- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2002 23:35:58 -0500 (EST)
- To: jonathan@openhealth.org
- Cc: connolly@w3.org, www-webont-wg@w3.org
From: "Jonathan Borden" <jonathan@openhealth.org> Subject: Re: proposal: Structured Datatypes Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2002 23:13:13 -0500 > Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: > > in response to my statement: > > > > > > That is the whole point of this. Given the above datatype, and if the > > > property is defined as functional the following entailment would hold: > > > > > > ex:foo ex:DTprop "<a>010</a><b>aaa</b>"^^rdfs:XMLLiteral > > > ex:bar ex:DTprop "<a>00010</a><b>aaa</b>"^^rdfs:XMLLiteral > > > > > > => > > > > > > ex:foo owl:sameIndividialAs ex:bar > > > > "<a>010</a><b>aaa</b>"^^rdfs:XMLLiteral and > > "<a>00010</a><b>aaa</b>"^^rdfs:XMLLiteral denote different elements of the > > RDF domain of discourse. Thus ex:foo owl:sameIndividialAs ex:bar would > not > > follow. > > what about: > > _:x owl:dtvalue "<a>010</a><b>aaa</b>"^^rdfs:XMLLiteral . > _:y owl:dtvalue "<a>00010</a><b>aaa</b>"^^rdfs:XMLLiteral > > _:x rdf:type ex:xType . > _:y rdf:type ex:xType . > > => > > _:x owl:sameIndividualAs _:y . > > It seems to me that there must be some way to allow that type of entailment > (I might not have the details correct but hopefully you understand where I > am trying to go). Perhaps not in which case this issue just may be too > difficult for this WG to tackle. > > Jonathan > This would require OWL to have its own machinery for datatyping, one completely independant from RDF datatyping. I don't think that we want to go there. peter
Received on Wednesday, 6 November 2002 23:36:09 UTC