- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: 19 Dec 2002 09:44:12 -0600
- To: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.umd.edu>
- Cc: webont <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
On Tue, 2002-12-17 at 10:11, Jim Hendler wrote: > 4/ Cardinality restrictions in the exchange syntax for OWL will use typed > literals, as in > _:x rdf:type owl:Restriction . > _:x owl:onProperty ex:foo . > _:x owl:cardinality "5"^^xsd:decimal . > I have been uneasy about this for some time. I don't think I can accept it. I don't think rdf:datatype is a good idea at all. It's not baked. Witness the recent interactions with parseType="Collection". I don't think we should use it. I think OWL should use numerals, not numbers, for cardinality constraints etc. That't the way my code has been doing it for a year or so now, and it works fine. Yes, "010" and "10" are different numerals. So don't write "010". -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Thursday, 19 December 2002 10:44:41 UTC