- From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2008 14:48:43 +0100
- To: W3C OWL Working Group <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
On 28 Aug 2008, at 14:28, Sandro Hawke wrote: >> This sounds like a good idea to me. > > Me too. > > BTW I raised issue-109 on a w3c staff list yesterday and it's turned > into a huge discussion. Not a simple topic. :-( Hopefully > we'll end > up with some useful information to share. Hmm. So I've initiated a DoS attack on the W3C team? Cool. Just call me "The DoStroyer"! Or maybe I'm just "DoStraught"? Someone stop me before I pun (though not properties) again! If it helps, there's no ambiguity. There is no element named with a URI and there is no property or class named with a QName. With no-attribute-namespaces, it won't be usual to have no prefixes for syntax names, further reducing any potential confusion. Cheers, Bijan.
Received on Friday, 29 August 2008 13:46:13 UTC