W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-wg@w3.org > May 2012

Re: status of xsd:duration in OWL (and RIF and SPARQL) - ACTION-164: RDF WG

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 4 May 2012 12:05:59 +0200
Cc: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>, Michael Schneider <schneid@fzi.de>, "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com>, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>, Ian Horrock <ian.horrocks@cs.ox.ac.uk>, "Evain, Jean-Pierre" <evain@ebu.ch>
Message-Id: <5B487B4B-7828-4BAD-A3BE-FAA5C4D4991B@w3.org>
To: public-owl-wg@w3.org, "Public-Rif-Wg (E-mail)" <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
(Removing some mailing lists from the CC list, because that seems to be a purely OWL, and possibly RIF WG discussion...)

I am not commenting on the technical issue. The current status of the WG is based on the latest extension of its charter announced in:

https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-ac-members/2011OctDec/0066.html

in my reading that does not allow adding new datatypes, or change the semantics of existing ones (except if there are technical issues created by the final version of the XSD document compared to the version we used when OWL 2 was finalized). Doing so would not mean an 'edited' OWL 2 document, but a new version instead. That would require rechartering the OWL WG or creating a new group.

I am sorry, just stating what I see are the administrative facts...

Ivan




On May 3, 2012, at 18:48 , Evain, Jean-Pierre wrote:

> Again, I am just a user but if I can help...
> 
> Jean-pierre
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bijan Parsia [mailto:bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk] 
> Sent: jeudi, 3. mai 2012 18:37
> To: Evain, Jean-Pierre
> Cc: Michael Schneider; 'Peter F. Patel-Schneider'; public-owl-wg@w3.org; public-rif-wg@w3.org; public-rdf-dawg@w3.org; public-rdf-wg
> Subject: Re: status of xsd:duration in OWL (and RIF and SPARQL) - ACTION-164: RDF WG
> 
> On 3 May 2012, at 17:05, Evain, Jean-Pierre wrote:
> 
>> Actually, I. am not that cool either.
>> 
>> dateTime is an incredible source of error by nature in particular if you want to express either tim or a date only. This is true in xml and now equally pollutes rdf and owl.
> 
> This has been a (severe) concrete problem in ontologies developed at the University of Manchester. It's worth revisiting.
> 
> If this family of datatypes are going to be considered at the RDF level, then we should, by all means, synch up requirements and, well, actual specs.
> 
> I happily volunteer to work on this from the OWL side (if there's concern about labor).
> 
> Cheers,
> Bijan.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> **************************************************
> This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed.
> If you have received this email in error, please notify the system manager. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by the mailgateway
> **************************************************
> 
> 


----
Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
Received on Friday, 4 May 2012 10:03:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:42:03 UTC