W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html-editor@w3.org > April to June 2009

Re: OWL-WG comment on CURIE

From: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
Date: Thu, 09 Apr 2009 16:34:14 -0500
Message-ID: <49DE69D6.60102@aptest.com>
To: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
CC: www-html-editor@w3.org, bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk, team-owl-chairs@w3.org
Thanks for this comment.  On a personal note, I would mention that as 
far as I am concerned the SPARQL model for abbreviated IRI via the use 
of PREFIX is compatible with the current CURIE specification.  If it is 
not, I would be shocked, since it was our intent that it fit within the 
model.

Sandro Hawke wrote:
> This is a minimalist comment on your "CURIE Syntax 1.0" Candidate
> Recommendation of 16 January [1].
>
> The message is simply that the OWL Working Group has chosen [2] to use
> its own IRI abbreviation mechanism (intended to be identical to the one
> used in SPARQL), instead of using CURIEs.
>
> Unfortunately, we don't have the resources to produce for you a detailed
> review, discussed and approved by the Working Group.  One member of the
> group (Bijan Parsia) has agreed to convey in a separate message his
> personal understanding of the issues, and we hope that will be helpful
> and sufficient.
>
>       -- Sandro Hawke (OWL-WG Staff Contact), on behalf of OWL WG
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/CR-curie-20090116/
> [2] http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/meeting/2009-03-25#resolution_3
>   

-- 
Shane P. McCarron                          Phone: +1 763 786-8160 x120
Managing Director                            Fax: +1 763 786-8180
ApTest Minnesota                            Inet: shane@aptest.com
Received on Thursday, 9 April 2009 21:35:17 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:17:59 GMT