Re: specifying minimal datatypes without reference to "OWL Tools"

At 9:25 AM -0500 7/1/03, Dan Connolly wrote:
>Hmm... I gather Peter is travelling.
>
>Meanwhile, I'd be interested to know if anybody
>else agrees or disagrees that this is an improvement...
>
>On Thu, 2003-06-26 at 09:37, Dan Connolly wrote:
>>  Prompted by Martin's I18N questions, I found...
>>
>>  "OWL tools need only implement the datatypes xsd:integer and
>>  xsd:string."
>>    --
>>  http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-semantics/syntax.html#owl_built_in_datatypes
>>
>>  What's an "OWL tool"? Let's specify the language
>>  without reference to software.
>>
>>  In 3.1. Vocabularies and Interpretations,
>>  please change the defintion of datatype theory
>>  and/or Abstract OWL interpretation so that
>>  integer and string have to be included in the
>>  set of datatypes for every Abstract OWL interpretation.
>>
>>  And change OWL interpretation in 5.2. OWL Interpretations
>>  likewise.
>>
>>  Then strike the "OWL tools..." bit in
>>  section 2. Abstract Syntax.
>
>--
>Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/


In my own opinion, I think what you suggest is an improvement.
-- 
Professor James Hendler				  hendler@cs.umd.edu
Director, Semantic Web and Agent Technologies	  301-405-2696
Maryland Information and Network Dynamics Lab.	  301-405-6707 (Fax)
Univ of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742	  *** 240-277-3388 (Cell)
http://www.cs.umd.edu/users/hendler      *** NOTE CHANGED CELL NUMBER ***

Received on Tuesday, 1 July 2003 10:33:28 UTC