W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-wg@w3.org > March 2008

OWL XML serialization

From: Rinke Hoekstra <hoekstra@uva.nl>
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2008 14:53:14 +0100
Message-Id: <8526EE2F-DEEE-428A-BAA0-65245257192C@uva.nl>
To: "Web Ontology Language ((OWL)) Working Group WG" <public-owl-wg@w3.org>

Dear all,

I just had a quick look at the OWL XML description and have some  
comments on it.

1) What is the rationale behind using owl11xml:URI instead of xml:id  
attributes on XML elements? It seems natural to adopt the standard way  
of identifying XML elements. This is a bit related to my earlier  
qualms on the URI's if entities in the Functional Syntax document. In  
my view, although a URI is a datatype that is specifically intended to  
be used for identification, it does not have to identify the element  
it is used 'on' (e.g. the rdf:resource attribute on RDF elements has a  
URI as it's value that 'points to' some other RDF element).

On the other hand, the xsd:ID attribute type expects a fragment  
identifier, and thus makes the use of an xml:base obligatory  
(something we cannot enforce using the XML schema).

2) Namespaces in XML should not include the fragment # character

3) the owl11xml: prefixes can be removed if you define http://www.w3.org/2006/12/owl11-xml 
  to be the default namespace (e.g. xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2006/12/owl11-xml 
" on the xsd:schema element )

-Rinke

-----------------------------------------------
Drs. Rinke Hoekstra

Email: hoekstra@uva.nl    Skype:  rinkehoekstra
Phone: +31-20-5253499     Fax:   +31-20-5253495
Web:   http://www.leibnizcenter.org/users/rinke

Leibniz Center for Law,          Faculty of Law
University of Amsterdam,            PO Box 1030
1000 BA  Amsterdam,             The Netherlands
-----------------------------------------------
Received on Wednesday, 5 March 2008 13:53:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 5 March 2008 13:53:27 GMT