On Jun 26, 2014 8:02 AM, "Antoine Zimmermann" <antoine.zimmermann@emse.fr>
wrote:
> With these constructs, you would never be able to define the value space
of gYear, which is disjoint from all OWL-compatible datatypes.
[...]
> Now, you can still use xsd:gYear if you want because OWL 2 DL processors
do not have to reject all non-compliant ontologies. Actually, most OWL
processors would not bother much about gYear. Besides, these restrictions
are for OWL 2 DL ontologies but the OWL specs also specify OWL Full
ontologies, which are all valid RDF graphs.
Pellet supports xsd:gYear, but as a time point, not an interval - see:
https://github.com/clarkparsia/pellet/blob/master/core/src/main/java/com/clarkparsia/pellet/datatypes/types/datetime/XSDGYear.java
Hermit only permits the OWL-DL datatypes, and checks for violations.
Fact++ and JFact only support the DL date types, but only signal an error
if they are asked to reason with them.
This reinforces your point that there is not much win available from using
gYear instead of an xsd:integer.