W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ddwg@w3.org > October 2007

RE: More comments on the ontology

From: Rhys Lewis <rhys@volantis.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2007 06:12:11 -0600 (MDT)
To: 'Josť Manuel Cantera Fonseca' <jmcf@tid.es>, "'Ubiquitous Web Applications Working Group WG'" <public-uwa@w3.org>, <public-ddwg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <00c301c80a6e$08590070$0202fea9@volantisuk>

Hi Jose,

Short URIs need to be approved by the W3C Director. Usually, we leave that
until quite late in the process once we know that the URI we ask for is
appropriate. I don't think we should do it until we are getting close to
Last Call for the ontology.

Cheers
Rhys

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-ddwg-request@w3.org
> [mailto:public-ddwg-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Josť Manuel
> Cantera Fonseca
> Sent: 09 October 2007 12:38
> To: Ubiquitous Web Applications Working Group WG; public-ddwg@w3.org
> Subject: More comments on the ontology
>
>
> Hi,
>
> Here are more comments on the ontology:
>
> + We should define a better URI for the ontology. What about
> something
> + like
>
>  http://www.w3.org/2007/DCO
>
> + URIs for well-known instances in the ontology. For example, for the
> ImageType class we have 4 well-known instances that represent
> well-known image types. Unfortunately the URIs for these
> instances are ugly (the number that automatically generated Protege).
> I think that the URIs representing this kind of instances
> should be very well-known, such as
> http://www.w3.org/2007/DCO#gif, etc.
> I think that the ontology should provide the normative
> "constants" to identify this kind of well-known values and we
> should URIs for representing this kind of things in the DDWG
> API. Fortunately there is a utility called SchemaGen that
> comes with Jena that might allow us to create all the
> well-known set of constants.
>
> Best Regards
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 9 October 2007 12:12:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 6 December 2009 12:13:51 GMT