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

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

From: Birte Glimm <birte.glimm@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 16:59:04 +0100
Message-ID: <AANLkTikgH6ce-RpG7rg7ErDWwurPhBvaTm0_s6h1jqJW@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Cc: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>, Chimezie Ogbuji <ogbujic@ccf.org>, SPARQL Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
I don't have a strong opinion, but I am concerned about #1 and #2 for
the reasons given and before Axel's and Ivan's email I didn't even
imagine that a new namespace would also be possible. Since it seems to
be, I have no problems with that since it would make the construct a
bit more future-proof. I am still less concerned about #3 than Ivan,
so either #3 or #4 would work well for me.
Birte

On 25 May 2010 12:54, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> wrote:
>
> On May 25, 2010, at 13:42 , Axel Polleres wrote:
>
>>
>> We have overall four alternatives, it seems:
>>
>> 1.  (ab)using the rif: namespace, i.e. rif:imports: might be acceptable, we need to check with rif group.
>>
>>    concern: may be confusing, since recursive imports are not considered as RIF-RF combination semantics doesn't know about rif:imports
>>
>
> Understand
>
>> 2.  (ab)using the rdf: namespace, i.e. rdf:rif-imports.
>>
>>    potentially similar issues as 1?
>>
>
> Indeed
>
>> 3.  use the sparql: namespace, which we need for functions etc. anyways... i.e.  sparql:rifImports or sparql:rif-imports
>>     pro: straightforward
>>     con: it was raised earlier that this import mechanism may be useful/needed by others, so we shouldn't tie it to sparql.
>>
>
> Agree with 'con' (sorry Birte, that is also an answer to you). I would not want this to be too sparql specific
>
>> 4. use a new namespace *and* a new prefix, eg. rif2rdf:imports where
>>     @prefix rif2rdf = <http://www.w3.org/ns/rif2rdf#imports>
>>
>>
>
> I actually do not have a problem with that one
>
>
>>
>> <chair-hat off> My personal opinion:
>>
>>  While I am still worried a lot about the objection for 1. and fear objections against 2., I am starting to think about the objection against 3. with a bit more distance... why should we speculate about later reuse that is not yet there? In case, others are free to reuse sparql:rifImports.
>>
>> - sceptical about 1.
>> - neutral about 2.
>> - in favor of 3.
>> - neutral about 4. (admittedly, I have no idea for a "sexy" prefix name, not entirely happy with rif2rdf: )
>>
>> </chair-hat off>
>
>
> I am more in favour of #4.
>
> Ivan
>
>
>>
>> Other expressions of preference?
>>
>> Axel
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Ivan
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 21 May 2010, at 15:52, Chimezie Ogbuji wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Okay, I've reverted back to this import URI, added an editorial note for the
>>>>> URI of entailment regime, added clarifying sentences in the editorial note
>>>>> regarding safety, and added additional references.  I've also updated
>>>>> 'Finite Answer Set Conditions (Informative)' with additional information
>>>>> regarding safety as well.
>>>>>
>>>>> -- Chime
>>>>>
>>>>> On 5/21/10 10:05 AM, "Ivan Herman" <ivan@w3.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.w3.org/ns/rif#imports
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ===================================
>>>>>
>>>>> P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail
>>>>>
>>>>> Cleveland Clinic is ranked one of the top hospitals
>>>>> in America by U.S.News & World Report (2009).
>>>>> Visit us online at http://www.clevelandclinic.org for
>>>>> a complete listing of our services, staff and
>>>>> locations.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Confidentiality Note:  This message is intended for use
>>>>> only by the individual or entity to which it is addressed
>>>>> and may contain information that is privileged,
>>>>> confidential, and exempt from disclosure under applicable
>>>>> law.  If the reader of this message is not the intended
>>>>> recipient or the employee or agent responsible for
>>>>> delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are
>>>>> hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or
>>>>> copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.  If
>>>>> you have received this communication in error,  please
>>>>> contact the sender immediately and destroy the material in
>>>>> its entirety, whether electronic or hard copy.  Thank you.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ----
>>> Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
>>> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
>>> mobile: +31-641044153
>>> PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
>>> FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> ----
> Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
> mobile: +31-641044153
> PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
> FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
>
>
>
>
>
>



-- 
Dr. Birte Glimm, Room 306
Computing Laboratory
Parks Road
Oxford
OX1 3QD
United Kingdom
+44 (0)1865 283529
Received on Tuesday, 25 May 2010 15:59:38 GMT

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