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

Re: ISSUE-137 (including XML includes)

From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2008 16:37:40 -0400
Message-ID: <29af5e2d0809121337k18607039g732f53dc7c113ae8@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Bijan Parsia" <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>, "W3C OWL Working Group" <public-owl-wg@w3.org>

On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 4:07 PM, Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk> wrote:
> On Sep 12, 2008, at 8:57 PM, Alan Ruttenberg wrote:

>> An inclusion directive could be
>> expressed as an RDF triple, and the OWL documentation could specify
>> how it should be interpreted (i.e. by including the triples resulting
>> from parsing the included document).
> Which is a change to the other serializations. They now have a triple that
> they have to interpret specially. Not just at the reasoner level, but at the
> parsing level.

No they don't. The inclusion directive would be interpreted by the OWL
processor, not by the RDF parser.

> Indeed, why should we impose a triple on them?

It's their job to carry triples.

> Turtle might prefer to add an @directive instead. N3 might prefer to use their own builtin.

I don't see how this affects what we need to do.

Received on Friday, 12 September 2008 20:38:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:42:06 UTC