W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rif-comments@w3.org > July 2008

Re: rif:text / owl:internationalizedString

From: Jie Bao <baojie@cs.rpi.edu>
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2008 13:18:16 -0400
Message-ID: <b6b357670807091018k1f7f355etdf8d2f4da2df2dc3@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Ivan Herman" <ivan@w3.org>
Cc: public-rif-comments@w3.org, public-owl-wg@w3.org, "Sandro Hawke" <sandro@w3.org>, "Axel Polleres" <axel.polleres@deri.org>

Thanks, Ivan

My understanding is that you propose to vote among rif, owl or a new
namespaces. Who will "toss a coin" - the OWL people, the RIF people,
or both?

Jie

On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 6:12 AM, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> wrote:
> Thank Jie a lot.
>
> One option you put forward is to add _INTERNATIONALIZEDSTRING_ to the rdf
> namespace. While this indeed looks as the most natural fit, the way the RDF
> Semantics is formulated[1] is by explicitly listing the RDF vocabulary,
> including the only datatype that RDF introduces (namely rdf:XMLLiteral). Ie,
> from a very formal point of view, _adding_ a new term to that namespace
> might be a bit messy; does it belong to the formal RDF vocabulary per RDF
> Semantics or not? We may want to keep away from that. [3] seems to say that
> the XML Schema group ('guardians' of the xsd namespace), is not really in
> favour of the xsd namespace.
>
> Looking at your options this leaves, in my view, with the rif or owl
> namespaces, which may have to be decided through the toss of a coin:-).
> Another alternative is to define a completely separate namespace for extra
> RDF stuffs, but I am not sure that is nice...
>
> Ivan
>
>
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-mt/#InterpVocab
> [2] http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/InternalizedString
> [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008May/0162.html
>
> Jie Bao wrote:
>>
>> As been suggested by Sandro, due to the closeness of rif:text and
>> owl:internationalizedString, the two working groups might have a joint
>> effort on combining the two constructs. There is an initial draft for
>> the specification of internationalized strings in the both two
>> languages. Comments are welcome.
>>
>> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/InternationalizedStringSpec
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Jie
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 10:00 AM, Jie Bao <baojie@cs.rpi.edu> wrote:
>>>
>>> I have put some scratch for the internationalized string document at
>>>
>>> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/InternalizedString
>>>
>>> Best
>>>
>>> Jie
>>>
>>> On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 11:27 AM, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The recommendation from the Semantic Web Coordination Group on this
>>>> matter of a new datatype [1][2] is to proceed with the single, small
>>>> Recommendation.  It's not clear what namespace to use, yet, but
>>>> hopefully it will become clearer soon.   (I'm leaning towards using the
>>>> XML Schema namespace, if that WG will consent.)
>>>>
>>>> So -- any volunteers, from either RIF or OWL to be an editor of this
>>>> document?  Ideally, I'd like one from each WG, since it's not clear yet
>>>> which WG will formally carry it through the process.  For an example of
>>>> a very short Rec, see [3].
>>>>
>>>>   -- Sandro
>>>>
>>>> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2008May/0060
>>>> [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-owl-wg/2008May/0021.html
>>>> [3] http://www.w3.org/1999/06/REC-xml-stylesheet-19990629/
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>
> --
>
> Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
> PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
> FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
>
Received on Wednesday, 9 July 2008 17:18:57 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 July 2008 17:18:58 GMT