Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Specification of owl:real as literal datatype should not be allowed #37

Closed
csnyulas opened this issue May 19, 2014 · 0 comments
Closed

Specification of owl:real as literal datatype should not be allowed #37

csnyulas opened this issue May 19, 2014 · 0 comments
Assignees
@matthewhorridge
Labels
Type: Enhancement A request for a change that is an enhancement

Comments

@csnyulas
Copy link
Member

Although it is OK to use owl:real as the range of a datatype property, owl:real should not be used as the type of a literal (for example in a datatype property value restriction), because conform to the OWL2 datatype map specification
( http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-syntax/#Real_Numbers.2C_Decimal_Numbers.2C_and_Integers )
"The owl:real datatype does not directly provide any lexical forms."
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@matthewhorridge matthewhorridge

Labels
Type: Enhancement A request for a change that is an enhancement
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
3 participants
@matthewhorridge @jvendetti @csnyulas