- From: Jeff Pan <pan@cs.man.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 06:24:43 -0000
- To: <ewallace@cme.nist.gov>, <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: <public-swbp-wg@w3.org>
Evan, Thanks for your comments. [...] > Detailed comments: > > - Section 1.3: Editorial/presentation issue - In the definition for an > "OWL datatype interpretation" are the words "for each supported > datatype URIref u w.r.t. D" intended to be subscript? They rendered > this way on every browser I tried. They are intented. To improve the visual appearance, we could rephase it as "LV (only) contains PL and the value spaces for each datatype in D." > - Section 1.4: In the definition for a "unary datatype group" the term > "primitive base datatype" is used. What is the qualifier "primitive" > meant to convey here? It seems to me that these are merely datatypes > in the group which are not derived from other datatypes in the > group. "base datatype" seems sufficient to convey this. The current > wording could be interpreted to denote XML Schema primitive datatypes, > which is inconsistent with the example. Each datatype is the base datatype of its derived datatypes; e.g., in Example 1A, integer is the base datatype of humanAge. A primitive base datatype in a unary datatype group can be different from a primitive datatype in a type system because we only support datatypes in the datatype map D. In other words, it is possible that only part of the derivation tree are supported; hence, the top datatype in a supported sub-derivation tree is the primitive base datatype in a unary datatype group. Similar discussion can be found in Section 3.2. > - In the definition for "unary datatype expressions" the text reading, > " the set of G unary datatype expressions," looks incorrect. Should > it read, "the set of unary datatype expressions for G,"? OK, will change as you suggest. > - Example 1D. Cool. Where and how can someone use this in OWL DL > descriptions? OWL does not support user-defined datatypes, which is the motivation of Section 2. A solution to extend OWL DL to support user-defined datatypes should cover 1) a standard way of referring to an XML Schema user defined simple type with a URI reference, and 2) a formal framework of combining SHOIN with user defined datatypes so that the combined language is still decidable. We will further revise Section 2 to cover the 2) point. Greetings, Jeff -- Dr. Jeff Z. Pan ( http://DL-Web.man.ac.uk/ ) School of Computer Science, The University of Manchester > - Section 2.3. Suggest adding a transition after the first > paragraph. Something like: "There are some issues with this > solution." > > - Section 3.5: In this section the term "primitive-equality" is used > to (I think) refer to equality as described in section 3.4. If this > is true, then the term should be introduced in section 3.4 and used > consistently thereafter when referring to that concept. > > - should the subsection entitled "Using eq in RDF and OWL" be better > titled "The Semantics of Using eq in RDF and OWL"? > > - There is still a note to the editor in this section, "@@@ todo > datetime stuff - I think they are all incomparible should check." > > ***** > > Evan >
Received on Sunday, 16 January 2005 14:25:28 UTC