RE: "Including" other RDF and RDFS files

>Well that feels very much like "Let them eat cake".    We *do* want
>people to use the same property to refer from one RDF graph to another,
>and for that to happen the WG should (imho) put semref in RDFS.

On the need I agree with Seth - right now I'm heading towards a painfully
arbitrary interpretation of this kind of link in the app I'm working on. On
the other hand, I'm not entirely convinced the benefits of adding a new
element outway the rejiggling it would cause. I suppose my own preferrence
would be for there to be a standardised approach to qualifying
seeAlso/isDefinedBy (strictly speaking, ok, there is already a standard -
'use RDF!', but guidelines on this might help keep people reading from the
same map). If there was a consensus way of doing this, then semref: could
easily be layer on top as a kind of abbreviation for the triples needed in a
qualified seeAlso/isDefinedBy.

Cheers,
Danny.