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 1HNReceived 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