W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg@w3.org > April to June 2010

Re: [ENT] reuse of rif namespace for rif:imports.

From: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
Date: Thu, 20 May 2010 20:23:06 +0100
Cc: Chimezie Ogbuji <ogbujic@ccf.org>, Birte Glimm <birte.glimm@comlab.ox.ac.uk>, SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <6DF85380-98B9-43F1-820D-A23B112D3F43@deri.org>
To: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
forgot to mention: this discharges ACTION-241

Axel

On 18 May 2010, at 17:54, Axel Polleres wrote:

> Chime, all,
> 
> I suggest to mark the URI for rif imports and namespace used still with an editor's note in section 7.1. 
> Both, 
> 1) I am not 100% happy with using the entailment namespace (http://www.w3.org/ns/entailment/) which seems to indicate that this is a URI defining an entailment regime
> 2) the rif:imports abbreviation seems to indicate that we mean the rif: namespace (http://www.w3.org/2007/rif)
> 
> So, I suggest we add an Ednote just saying:
> 
> "The namespace and URI used for rif:imports is still under discussion with in the group"
> 
> for now.
> 
> P.S.: Talked to the RIF guys today again in the RIF TC, they obviously want to review the doc (especially in case we reuse the rif: namespace)
> I am personally not so fond anymore of reusing the RIF namespace, since - as rif:imports has no semantics in RIF - that might be misleading.
Received on Thursday, 20 May 2010 19:23:41 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 16:15:42 GMT