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

Re: rif:text / owl:internationalizedString

From: Ian Horrocks <ian.horrocks@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2008 19:48:20 +0100
Message-Id: <814BBC26-274C-49D5-B67A-B770D057B217@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
Cc: Jie Bao <baojie@cs.rpi.edu>, public-rif-comments@w3.org, public-owl-wg@w3.org, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>, Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>

Seems reasonable to me (toss of a coin that is).

I think that it is easy from a practical point of view -- I suggest  
something like "least significant digit of NASDAQ at close of  
business on 2008xxyy in range 0 to 4 means we use owl namespace;  
otherwise we use rif namespace".

Ian


On 9 Jul 2008, at 19:01, Ivan Herman wrote:

>
>
> Jie Bao wrote:
>> Thanks, Ivan
>> My understanding is that you propose to vote among rif, owl or a new
>> namespaces.
>
> That is indeed my opinion (but there have been objections to my  
> opinion since..)
>
>>             Who will "toss a coin" - the OWL people, the RIF people,
>> or both?
>
> In my opinion the coin should be tossed together, so to say (I am  
> not sure how:-). More seriously: this is planned to be a 'joint'  
> document, ie, such decision should be done together...
>
> Ivan
>
>
>> 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
>>>
>
> -- 
>
> 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 Thursday, 10 July 2008 20:05:11 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 10 July 2008 20:05:12 GMT