- From: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.umd.edu>
- Date: Sun, 27 Jul 2003 13:50:49 -0400
- To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>, horrocks@cs.man.ac.uk
- Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org
Ian - this looks okay to me, send it. At 12:15 PM -0400 7/27/03, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: >Other than the typo pointed out below, this looks good to me. > >peter > > >From: Ian Horrocks <horrocks@cs.man.ac.uk> >Subject: Proposed response to Dave Reynolds on dataranges >Date: Sun, 27 Jul 2003 12:49:37 +0100 > >> >> Here is a proposed response to Dave Beckett on his named datarange >> comment. >> >> Ian >> >> =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ >> >> Dave, >> >> Thank you for your comments. >> >> I will attempt to provide some further clarification regarding the >> WG's decision not to support naming of data ranges. The second part of >> your comment (regarding bNodes) is/will be dealt with separately. >> >> The issue of named dataranges was discussed at the editors meeting in >> Boston. (see [1]). The following potential problems were identified: >> >> 1. Clearly, we would like to have access in OWL to a full range of >> user-defined XML Schema datatypes derived from the built-in datatypes >> that can already be used in OWL (see [2]). This would include >> enumerated datatypes corresponding to OWL dataranges. We expect >> XML:Schema to ultimately provide a mechanism to support this. Naming >> dataranges in OWL would provide a "completing" mechanism (i.e., > ^^^ competing? >> provide an alternative way to name user defined datatypes), and this >> could interact in an undesirable way with the XML:Schema mechanism as >> and when it is introduced. >> >> 2. OWL DL is designed so as to allow reasoning about datatypes and >> values to be cleanly separated from reasoning about classes and >> individuals. Introducing OWL names for dataranges may compromise this >> design. >> >> It was therefore decided not to include them in the language at >> present. It may be possible to add them in the future as and when a >> thorough investigation of the issues proves that they would not have >> any adverse effects. >> >> >> Please reply to this message as to whether this response is satisfactory, >> copying public-webont-wg@w3.org. Again, thank you for your comments. >> >> Ian Horrocks >> >> >> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Mar/0038.html >> [2] >>http://www-db.research.bell-labs.com/user/pfps/owl/semantics/semantics-all.html#2.1 >> >> >> > Message-ID: <3F1E5386.A80B1974@hplb.hpl.hp.com> >> > Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 10:21:10 +0100 >> > From: Dave Reynolds <der@hplb.hpl.hp.com> >> > To: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.umd.edu> >> > CC: public-webont-comments@w3.org >> > Subject: Re: OWL comment - blank nodes in OWL DL >> > >> > >> > Jim, >> > >> > Thank you for your response to the Jena team comments on these issues. >> > Overall this response is not (yet) acceptable. >> > >> > (a) Issue: Named data ranges >> > Your response: postpone >> > >> > We understand that the working group cannot name user-defined >>XSD datatypes >> > and that matter should be raised with the XML Schema working group. >> > >> > Our concern was more one of uniformity - it seems possible to have both >> > named and unnamed classes, why not data ranges? The more uniform >>a language >> > is, the easier the API and the fewer the support calls. >> > >> > As an example could this: >> > >> > <owl:DataRange rdf:about="#MyDR"> >> > <owl:oneOf> >> > <rdf:List> >> > <rdf:first>foo</rdf:first> >> > <rdf:rest rdf:resource="&rdf;nil"/> >> > </rdf:List> >> > </owl:oneOf> >> > </owl:DataRange> >> > >> > be included in OWL DL, for greater uniformity with other unnamed things in >> > OWL DL (which can optionally be named). >> > >> > I confess to not understanding the research problems that you refer to as >> > being raised by naming data ranges. If there is some non-trivial problem >> > here then we certainly accept this is not a sufficiently >>important issue to >> > warrant additional research at this stage in the process. >> > >> > Has the WG discussed this question? >> > None of the three links you gave seemed directly related to our request: >> > [1] >> > http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/webont-issues.html#I5.8-Datatypes >> > [2] >> > >>http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/webont-issues.html#I4.3-Structured-Datatypes >> > [3] >> > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002May/0040.html -- 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 Sunday, 27 July 2003 13:51:03 UTC