W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > March 2002

Re: n3 wishlist: automatic namespace selection

From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2002 17:17:21 -0500
Message-Id: <200203072217.g27MHLd25073@wadimousa.hawke.org>
To: "Tim Berners-Lee" <timbl@w3.org>
cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org

> However, I am not happy to make soemthing in which there is
> a search path for a matching  namespace.  This is unbeliveably 
> prone to error in  large systems.  

Oh yeah, I forgot about that problem.

I was thinking there would be no ordering -- if a definition was found
in more than one ontology, an error would be reported.  If ontologies
were well-behaved in never losing terms, this means at worst one's code
would produce an error instead of the wrong results.    Is that still
too dangerous to provide to users?

Another option is to have a processor which rewrites my suggested form
into your suggested form.   So you can be lazy when writing, run that
processor, and thereafter you're immune to the changes you're worried
about.  (If you want to do lazy mods to the code, you should run the
processor in another mode where it makes sure things are still the
same way, before you make your mods.)

> How about a sort of "import from"?
> 
> @use  text, pen, author, color <//http://address/of/one/ontology#>.
> @use cost, total <//http://address/of/one/ontology2#>.
> @keyword  this, forall, forsome, a.
> @prefix defualt   http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/log.
> 
> where the "use" and "keyword"  cut out specific words,
> leaving the rest to be from the default space.

That's pretty nice.    

Why not have @keyword be @use for some namespace?    Maybe we need
to have that discussion about what exactly is "magic" syntax.   I keep
thinking we don't really need it.

   -- sandro
Received on Thursday, 7 March 2002 17:17:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:53 GMT