- From: Jeremy Carroll <jeremy@topquadrant.com>
- Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 23:30:36 +0100
- To: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
- CC: Holger Knublauch <holger@knublauch.com>, Ian Emmons <iemmons@bbn.com>, Simon Reinhardt <simon.reinhardt@koeln.de>, semantic-web@w3.org
Hi Alan you seem to have forgotten yourself, or at least that bit of yourself that read the OWL 2 documents. Alan Ruttenberg wrote: > As far as any of the semantic web technologies go xml:base *does not > exist*. The specs know *nothing* about it. Nor should they. > > I read: http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/REC-owl2-xml-serialization-20091027/#IRIs /[[ MUST/ be resolved against the respective /base IRI/ as specified in the XML Base specification [XML Base <http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/REC-owl2-xml-serialization-20091027/#ref-xml-base>]. ]] I read http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/REC-owl2-primer-20091027/#Ontology_Management and see the second set of examples using xml:base in both the RDF/XML and the OWL/XML The automated converter for the OWL2 tests appears to add xml:base for both RDF/XML and OWL/XML formats, e.g. see http://owl.semanticweb.org/page/Qualified-cardinality-restricted-int The OWL1 test cases all have explicit xml:base What is the role of an xml:base, well that is explained in RFC 3986, section 5.1.1. This explicitly takes precedence over the retrieval URI, when doing base conversions. In particular, the function of TopBraid Composer which adds an appropriate xml:base declaration to a file to allow a copy to be stored locally, and for relative URI computations to be made correctly seems to be the primary intended purpose. (Of course, there is also a normative dependency from OWL2 to xml:base via RDF/XML Syntax) Jeremy
Received on Tuesday, 10 November 2009 22:31:23 UTC