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

Re: Status of OWL 2 Mapping to RDF Graphs

From: Peter F.Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 14:31:15 -0400
Message-ID: <20090518.143115.131174631.pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
To: <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
CC: <public-owl-wg@w3.org>, <mak@aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de>, <evren@clarkparsia.com>
I do not think that this is an appropriate place to so specify.  The
mapping in "Mapping to RDF Graphs" produces RDF graphs, not RDF/XML or,
really, any particular serialization of an RDF graph, even though of
necessity the document uses a particular syntax for RDF graphs.  It is
up to implementations to decide what to do with the various aspects of
rdf:text serialization.

I don't think that it is even a good idea to even allude to this problem
in "Mapping to RDF Graphs", just as it is not a good idea to even allude
to the problems in serializing some RDF Graphs in RDF/XML in this
document either.


From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Status of OWL 2 Mapping to RDF Graphs
Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 13:16:08 -0500

> I have noticed an issue with the translation of rdf:text literals. It
> seems to me that mapping should be where it is specified that rdf:text
> literals get translated to plain literals.
> -Alan
> On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 8:45 AM, Evren Sirin <evren@clarkparsia.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 10:57 AM, Ian Horrocks
>> <ian.horrocks@comlab.ox.ac.uk> wrote:
>>> Michael, Markus, Evren,
>>> As LC1 reviewers of Mapping to RDF Graphs can you please take a *very* quick
>>> look at the latest version and confirm that you are OK with any minor
>>> changes that may have occurred since the 1st Last Call and that, in your
>>> opinion, the document is "CR-ready".
>> I'm fine with all the changes and I think the document is CR-ready,
>> Cheers,
>> Evren
Received on Monday, 18 May 2009 18:31:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:42:12 UTC