- From: Alistair Miles <alistair.miles@zoo.ox.ac.uk>
- Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2008 17:29:51 +0100
- To: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
- Cc: Guus Schreiber <schreiber@cs.vu.nl>, SWD WG <public-swd-wg@w3.org>
On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 09:43:15AM +0200, Antoine Isaac wrote: > Hi, > > There is something I don't understand here: if we do not need to use > custom user-defined datatypes when one needs only one notation, what > should be used in that case then? No datatype? A plain literal with no language tag, I guess... <foo> skos:notation "bar" . Al. > > Antoine > >> Hi Guus, >> >> On Thu, Oct 09, 2008 at 04:03:19PM +0200, Guus Schreiber wrote: >> >>> NOTATIONS >>> >>> [[ >>> The OWL WG notes that one portion of SKOS (Notations) uses custom >>> datatypes. Although these seem to be benign, because RDF and OWL allow >>> extra datatypes, the use of these datatypes is not likely to be >>> supported by many tools. The presence of extra datatypes may cause >>> difficulties in some tools, which may just reject SKOS documents that >>> have these datatypes. >>> ]] >>> >>> Sean already pointed out that we can indicate in the document that >>> user-defined datatypes are only explicitly needed when one needs >>> multiple notations (so only in Sec. ). In addition I would like to >>> add the tools should not reject SKOS documents containing >>> user-defined datatypes, see the OWL reference section on datatype >>> reasoning [2], in particular the last sentence: >>> >>> [[ >>> Unrecognized datatypes should be treated in the same way as >>> unsupported datatypes. >>> ]] >>> >> >> This approach seems sound to me. >> >> Cheers, >> >> Alistair. >> >> > > -- Alistair Miles Senior Computing Officer Image Bioinformatics Research Group Department of Zoology The Tinbergen Building University of Oxford South Parks Road Oxford OX1 3PS United Kingdom Web: http://purl.org/net/aliman Email: alistair.miles@zoo.ox.ac.uk Tel: +44 (0)1865 281993
Received on Monday, 13 October 2008 16:30:28 UTC