Re: FOAF OWL DL

Alan Ruttenberg wrote:
> 
> It's OWL, but not OWL-DL.
> I would very much like there to be an OWL-DL version too, or at least to 
> factor it into two components - an OWL-DL portion, and a set of further 
> axioms that are imported by OWL full users.

I've wondered about how best to do this: are there any discovery 
conventions for finding an OWL DL flavour of a vocabulary which 
otherwise also has OWL Full variants at the namespace URI? Or 
vice-versa? Could eg. editors read HTML or RDF/XML from the namespace 
URI, poke around and find the URL to a pure DL subset?

Dan

--
http://danbri.org/