W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lod@w3.org > June 2009

Re: http://ld2sd.deri.org/lod-ng-tutorial/

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 21:58:08 +0200
Message-ID: <4A3FE250.9080606@danbri.org>
To: Yves Raimond <yves.raimond@gmail.com>
CC: martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org, Michael Hausenblas <michael.hausenblas@deri.org>, hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org, Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>, "Hepp, Martin" <mhepp@computer.org>, Hugh Glaser <hg@ecs.soton.ac.uk>, mark.birbeck@webbackplane.com, "Booth, David (HP Software - Boston)" <dbooth@hp.com>, "public-lod@w3.org" <public-lod@w3.org>
[snip]

Yup, re owl:imports, I enthusiastically added it to the FOAF spec when 
some OWL WG insider suggested it was the right thing to use, and 
dutifully removed it when someone (I forget who in both cases - quite 
possibly same person!) a few years later told me it had fallen from 
fashion within the OWL scene.

Re attitudes to OWL ... I do agree there have in the distant past (ie. 
last year!) been a few casually dismissive remarks around here regarding 
OWL. It's all too easy for a healthy enthusiasm for practical tools to 
trick us into seeing tools that we're not so familiar with as 
impractical. I'm happy to have read plenty of useful discussion here and 
nearby about how best to use or augment owl:sameAs. FOAF is a described 
using OWL. I expect some day in the not too distant future, Dublin Core 
Terms will be described in OWL too. And the community on 
public-lod@w3.org have been excellent champions of both. Things aren't 
too polarised, despite the occasional lapses into "them and us"-ism...

Optimistically,

Dan
Received on Monday, 22 June 2009 19:58:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Sunday, 31 March 2013 14:24:21 UTC