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

Re: Identifying OWL 1.1 files & the OWL namespace

From: Pierre-Antoine Champin <swlists-040405@champin.net>
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 17:51:55 +0100
Message-ID: <45B63D2B.6070205@champin.net>
CC: public-owl-dev@w3.org

Holger Knublauch a écrit :
> Thinking further about OWL 1.1 support, I am wondering whether we should
> try to introduce conventions that make it easier for tools to
> distinguish OWL 1.1 files from OWL 1.0 files.  This is for example
> necessary to adjust user interfaces (menu entries etc) to support the
> additional constructs.
> This leads me to two questions.
> 1) Do we assume that the additional OWL 1.1 vocabulary (such as
> owl:SelfRestriction ;) ) will be added to the OWL meta vocabulary [1]?
> Then the usual owl: prefix would be used, giving OWL files a more
> consistent look.  However, I am not sure whether it is a recommended
> practice to change a namespace that is now so widely deployed.

I'm quite sure it is a *bad* idea ;)

> An
> alternative would be to use a different namespace for the new 1.1 URIs -
> this could help distinguish OWL 1.1 documents as well, but would also
> mean that something like an owl11: prefix would be required.

a third option would be to put both old and new URIs in the OWL 1.1
namespace, and use a unique prefix owl: corresponding to that new namespace.

- advantage: good-looking OWL files, and easy detection of the version
  by looking at the namespace declaration

- drawback: OWL 1.0 agents would not recognize even the old URIs in OWL
  1.1 files. But do we really want an OWL 1.1 file to be partially
  parsed by a OWL 1.0 agent?

> 2) Since OWL 1.1 is evolving and URIs and semantics of its constructs
> may change, would it make sense to annotate documents with something
> like an owl:versionInfo = "OWL 1.1 (27-11-2006)" in the owl:Ontology?

This could definitely do no harm, though this could also appear in the

Received on Tuesday, 23 January 2007 16:52:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:58:14 UTC