W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-wg@w3.org > January 2009

Re: ACTION-265 DONE

From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.manchester.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 23:27:50 +0000
Cc: "Bijan Parsia" <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>, "W3C OWL Working Group" <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <4A8A4380-E8E3-496A-A5EF-0C0E60AFF510@cs.manchester.ac.uk>
To: "Michael Schneider" <schneid@fzi.de>

On 21 Jan 2009, at 20:42, Michael Schneider wrote:

> Hi!
>
> I would put the "named class" option to the top of the list.

Oy. Such wordsmithing! So unnecessary! :)

> I think our
> annotation approach can now be pretty well described by: "The  
> objects of
> annotations are URIs."

No:
	http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Syntax#Annotations_of_Ontologies.2C_Axioms.2C_and_other_Annotations

	"""AnnotationValue := AnonymousIndividual | IRI | Literal"""

So the string version is just as canonical. :)

> And since the "named class" option just introduces
> such a URI, it looks to me to be the most obvious of the proposed
> workarounds.

Which is the most "obvious" is irrelevant, methinks. They all involve  
tradeoffs. They all require tool intervention to mitigate those  
tradeoffs.

Cheers,
Bijan.
Received on Wednesday, 21 January 2009 23:28:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 21 January 2009 23:28:34 GMT