W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > April 2002

Re: schema

From: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 15:12:23 -0700
Message-Id: <p05101507b8f3629cfb07@[65.212.118.251]>
To: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
>Another worry re terminology is that we have two Semantic Web working
>groups. One group calls RDF schemas

.....and what are those, exactly? I have never known what this term 
is supposed to mean. Do you mean an RDF graph containing RDFS 
vocabulary?

>'schemas', the other calls them
>'ontologies'. To date we've not really used the latter term in RDF Core
>specs.

Right, and let's not.

>I personally don't like it, but that's not important. What is
>importnat is terminological consistency at least within the RDF-based
>corner of W3C's work. I'm stumped as to what we do about that. People will
>ask us (of some RDF/XML schema that uses WebOnt machinery) whether it is
>an 'ontology' or a 'schema'. Maybe we don't need an answer, but it does
>seem a bit odd to not know collectively (in WebOnt + RDF Core) what we
>think we're talking about. Editorial suggestions / contribs on this
>welcomed...

Both terms have weeds attached that cause confusion. Maybe we should 
use a new term altogether so that *we* can say what it means., 
something bland like 'module'. (??) Or what wrong with just talking 
about RDF graphs?

Pat

-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC					(850)434 8903   home
40 South Alcaniz St.			(850)202 4416   office
Pensacola,  FL 32501			(850)202 4440   fax
phayes@ai.uwf.edu 
http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes
Received on Tuesday, 30 April 2002 13:02:50 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:47:40 EDT