• To: <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: question: can anyone give me a reason why OWL should have datatypes?
• From: "bryan" <bry@i...>
• Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2002 15:23:01 +0200
• Importance: Normal
• In-reply-to: <D0F1529EE943B3449F755CA1A40887465B3FD4@w...>

So I was looking over Owl
http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-webont-req-20020708/

When I found yet another case of interlock with WXSDL(under
section-use-cases; R15. Complex data types). The motivations given were
compatibility with other standards, and ease of use.

Anyone excited about this and think it's a good idea?
Anyone over-excited by this and think it's the worst idea since
one-dimensional bread?
I got a gut reaction that immediately spun me into the second camp, am
looking to climb out and learn to smile, smile again.

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: question: can anyone give me a reason why OWL shouldhave datatypes?
    • From: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@c...>

• References:
  • RE: Slightly off, but... was: XUL appears to be dead,istheresome other standard that should be looked at
    • From: "Sebastian Schnitzenbaumer" <schnitz@m...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Browser support of XML standards (WAS: RE:Slightly off, but... was: XUL appears to...)
• Next by Date: RE: Slightly off, but... was: XUL appears to be dead,istheresome other standard that should be looked at
• Previous by thread: RE: Slightly off, but... was: XUL appears to be dead,istheresome other standard that should be looked at
• Next by thread: Re: question: can anyone give me a reason why OWL shouldhave datatypes?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread