Re: draft response for LC comment 20 JDB1

I'm not sure it's quite right to say that float an double are part of  
RL now. It seems sensible that they should be given the current  
positions of the interested parties. I put a proposal in this weeks  
agenda so we can record a formal resolution to this effect (i.e.,  
that float an double are part of RL) just to be completely clear.

Ian


On 17 Mar 2009, at 04:42, Alan Ruttenberg wrote:

> Ian points out, (and I just checked) that float an double are part of
> RL now. So the section I was concerned about
>
> "Implementation difficulties have resulted in xsd:float and xsd:double
> remaining out of OWL 2 RL.  If these difficulties can be overcome the
> two datatypes may be included in OWL 2 RL.  If changes occurs the
> working group will notify you."
>
> can just be omitted.
>
> -Alan
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 4:26 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider
> <pfps@research.bell-labs.com> wrote:
>> I'm not sure why this is relevant to the reply.  We have removed the
>> incorrect rationale and extended the collection of OWL 2 RL  
>> datatypes,
>> in response to the point brought up by Jos.
>>
>> However, if you have suggestions for changes to the wording of the
>> reply, feel free to propose same.
>>
>> peter
>>
>>
>> From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
>> Subject: Re: draft response for LC comment 20 JDB1
>> Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 14:27:34 -0400
>>
>>> Hi Peter,
>>>
>>> I think a few words about, or pointer to a discussion of the
>>> implementation issues that are relevant to OWL RL in this response
>>> should be added.
>>>
>>> -Alan
>>>
>>> On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 9:28 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider
>>> <pfps@research.bell-labs.com> wrote:
>>>> [Draft Response for LC Comment 20:] JDB1
>>>>
>>>> Dear Jos,
>>>>
>>>> Thank you for your message
>>>>  <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-comments/ 
>>>> 2009Jan/0022.html>
>>>> on the OWL 2 Web Ontology Language last call drafts.
>>>>
>>>> You are correct that OWL 2 RL does not need the intersection of
>>>> datatypes to be empty or infinite.  Accordingly the datatypes in  
>>>> OWL 2
>>>> RL have been adjusted to include all the OWL datatypes that are
>>>> restrictions of xsd:decimal and xsd:string and also xsd:boolean.
>>>>
>>>> In response to another comment
>>>>  <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2009Jan/ 
>>>> 0083.html>
>>>> on the difficulty of implementing datatypes in rules systems,
>>>> owl:real and owl:rational have been removed from OWL 2 RL.
>>>> This possibility was mentioned in Feature At Risk #2.
>>>>
>>>> The diffs for these changes can be found at
>>>> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/index.php? 
>>>> title=Profiles&diff=18687&oldid=18109
>>>>
>>>> Implementation difficulties have resulted in xsd:float and  
>>>> xsd:double
>>>> remaining out of OWL 2 RL.  If these difficulties can be  
>>>> overcome the
>>>> two datatypes may be included in OWL 2 RL.  If changes occurs the
>>>> working
>>>> group will notify you.
>>>>
>>>> Please acknowledge receipt of this email to
>>>> <mailto:public-owl-comments@w3.org> (replying to this email should
>>>> suffice). In your acknowledgment please let us know whether or  
>>>> not you
>>>> are satisfied with the working group's response to your comment.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Peter F. Patel-Schneider
>>>> on behalf of the W3C OWL Working Group
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>

Received on Tuesday, 17 March 2009 14:56:02 UTC