W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-dev@w3.org > April to June 2007

Namespaces -- Out of scope of OWL?

From: Turner, David <davidt@hp.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 10:01:49 +0100
Message-ID: <86FE9B2B91ADD04095335314BE6906E8D6D4EA@sdcexc04.emea.cpqcorp.net>
To: <public-owl-dev@w3.org>

The OWL/1.0 abstract syntax is essentially silent on the subject of
QNames, namespaces and how to abbreviate URIs; I imagine this is because
they're a pretty thorny issue that's a bit implementation-specific.

The OWL/1.1 spec *does* have QNames etc, and includes namespace
declarations in the abstract syntax. I think it would be safer to remove
this and follow the OWL/1.0 path of leaving this up to implementors. The
treatment of names in OWL/1.1 is essentially exactly that of OWL/1.0
except that we use IRIs instead of URIs (as noted in OWL-concepts).

For example, if a user were to define 'amp' as a namespace prefix, they
may be surprised by the effects this has on certain bits of the XML
serialisation of their ontology.

Cheers,

Dave





-- 
Dave Turner  Cube T400, HP Labs Bristol, Filton Road, Bristol BS34 8QZ
davidt@hp.com          +44 117 3129104 (Work) +44 7962 811627 (Mobile)

Hewlett-Packard Limited. Registered No: 690597 England
Registered Office: Cain Road, Bracknell, Berks RG12 1HN
Received on Thursday, 19 April 2007 09:02:17 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 27 March 2013 09:32:54 GMT