W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-dev@w3.org > July to September 2009

File extensions vs namespaces?

From: Brad Cox <bradjcox@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 19:40:53 -0400
Message-Id: <2AF16E4E-CA0D-47A7-92C3-8FE6BCAB84CE@gmail.com>
To: public-owl-dev@w3.org
Cc: Brad Cox <bradjcox@gmail.com>
I've been searching for a way to build ontologies that raise the least  
possible uncertainties/questions with my users and keep stumbling over  
what's probably a simple problem. Hope someone here can help:

Here's the pattern I use now.

<rdf:RDF
	...
	xmlns:core="http://fed.gov/ontology/2009/07/core#"
	xmlns:dod="http://fed.gov/ontology/2009/07/dod#"
	xmlns:pmbc="http://fed.gov/ontology/2009/07/pmbc#"
	xml:base="http://fed.gov/ontology/2009/07/dod"
 >
	<owl:Ontology rdf:about="">
		<rdfs:comment>A comment</rdfs:comment>
		<rdfs:label>{$file}</rdfs:label>
	        <owl:imports rdf:resource="http://fed.gov/ontology/2009/07/ 
core"/>
		...
	</owl:Ontology>

This works so long as the target of those owl:imports have no  
extension. If I move "core" to "core.owl" (to stop tools like Protege  
from refusing to even consider extension-less filenames), the only way  
I can make things work is to rejigger the whole file
so that the namespace is core.owl too. There are about a half-dozen  
such cases; core, pmbc, dod, etc.

I want the file/resource name to be pmbc.owl but the namespace to be http://fed.gov/ontology/2009/07/pmbc# 
.

	xmlns:pmbc="http://fed.gov/ontology/2009/07/pmbc#"

Is that possible?
Received on Monday, 27 July 2009 23:41:36 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 27 March 2013 09:32:57 GMT