Issue 18838: MOF/XMI schemaType is incorrectly defined relative to its use and its scope is too restrictive (mof2xmi-rtf) Source: NASA (Dr. Nicolas F. Rouquette, nicolas.f.rouquette(at)jpl.nasa.gov) Nature: Uncategorized Issue Severity: Summary: MOF/XMI defines the schemaType tag as follows: "The name of a datatype defined in the XML Schema Datatype specification." First,the examples in the MOF/XMI specification and current use of this tag in OMG's XMI artifacts use datatype URIs, not datatype names. Second, the definition of this tag is vague about which datatypes are allowed. - The builtin datatypes explicitly defined in the XML Schema Datatype spec? http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/REC-xmlschema11-2-20120405/#built-in-datatypes - Any datatype defined in the "xs" namespace? Consider for example "precision decimal", a datatype that is explicitly mentioned but not explicitly defined in the XML Schema Datatypes spec: http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/REC-xmlschema11-2-20120405/#primitive-vs-derived This datatype is explicitly defined in a different specification but in the "xs" namespace: http://www.w3.org/TR/xsd-precisionDecimal/#precisionDecimal This example illustrates the ambiguity of the scope as currently specified, that is, is "xs:precisionDecimal" allowed as a value for schemaType? Third, even if schemaType were to be clarified to be some subset of datatypes defined in the "xs" namespace, there are legitimate business reasons to expect greater flexibility. - Several OMG specifications define XSDs (e.g., BPMN, DTV, …) If these include XML Schema datatype definitions, why are we precluded from referring to them via a PrimitiveType that has a schemaType tag pointing to their URI? - For working with RDF, it would make sense to define a PrimitiveType whose schemaType tag maps it to rdf:PlainLiteral — I.e., http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-plain-literal/#Definition_of_the_rdf:PlainLiteral_Datatype - Similarly, for OWL, it would make sense to define PrimitiveType that would be mapped to owl:Rational and owl:Real: http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/REC-owl2-syntax-20121211/#Datatype_Maps Resolution: Revised Text: Actions taken: July 31, 2013: received issue October 20, 2014: deferred Discussion: This issue was received well after the comment deadline and would require a fair bit of thought as to the implications – not only on XMI but other specifications including MOF and metamodels. Disposition: Deferred End of Annotations:===== m: "Rouquette, Nicolas F (313K)" To: Juergen Boldt CC: Pete Rivett , "mof2xmi-rtf@omg.org" , "issues@omg.org" Subject: MOF/XMI schemaType is incorrectly defined relative to its use and its scope is too restrictive Thread-Topic: MOF/XMI schemaType is incorrectly defined relative to its use and its scope is too restrictive Thread-Index: AQHOjgYJARALZCYpWEma74nIVkN9JQ== Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 15:53:01 +0000 Accept-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.3.4.130416 x-originating-ip: [128.149.137.113] X-Source-Sender: nicolas.f.rouquette@jpl.nasa.gov X-AUTH: Authorized X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at omg.org Juergen, Can you please file the following as the summary of an issue for XMI 2.5? MOF/XMI defines the schemaType tag as follows: "The name of a datatype defined in the XML Schema Datatype specification." First,the examples in the MOF/XMI specification and current use of this tag in OMG's XMI artifacts use datatype URIs, not datatype names. Second, the definition of this tag is vague about which datatypes are allowed. - The builtin datatypes explicitly defined in the XML Schema Datatype spec? http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/REC-xmlschema11-2-20120405/#built-in-datatypes - Any datatype defined in the "xs" namespace? Consider for example "precision decimal", a datatype that is explicitly mentioned but not explicitly defined in the XML Schema Datatypes spec: http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/REC-xmlschema11-2-20120405/#primitive-vs-derived This datatype is explicitly defined in a different specification but in the "xs" namespace: http://www.w3.org/TR/xsd-precisionDecimal/#precisionDecimal This example illustrates the ambiguity of the scope as currently specified, that is, is "xs:precisionDecimal" allowed as a value for schemaType? Third, even if schemaType were to be clarified to be some subset of datatypes defined in the "xs" namespace, there are legitimate business reasons to expect greater flexibility. - Several OMG specifications define XSDs (e.g., BPMN, DTV, .) If these include XML Schema datatype definitions, why are we precluded from referring to them via a PrimitiveType that has a schemaType tag pointing to their URI? - For working with RDF, it would make sense to define a PrimitiveType whose schemaType tag maps it to rdf:PlainLiteral . I.e., http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-plain-literal/#Definition_of_the_rdf:PlainLiteral_Datatype - Similarly, for OWL, it would make sense to define PrimitiveType that would be mapped to owl:Rational and owl:Real: http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/REC-owl2-syntax-20121211/#Datatype_Maps - Nicolas.