W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > February 2005

RE: Significant W3C Confusion over Namespace Meaning and Policy

From: Jonathan Borden <jonathan@openhealth.org>
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2005 10:24:49 -0500
Message-Id: <200502211524.j1LFOn6N090839@ohcg.spinweb.net>
To: "'Patrick Stickler'" <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
Cc: <www-tag@w3.org>

Patrick Stickler wrote:
[jb]
>>
>> In the same way an XML Schema might be obtained when dereferencing a
>> namespace qualitifed XML element name, and this might be used to 
>> validate
>> the content.

> But *which* ontology?! *Which* XML Schema?!
>
>Multiple ontologies/schemas/models/versions can all employ the same 
>term!

I am not claiming that RDDL solves this problem by itself.

What RDDL enables is a mechanism for the namespace author to *list* multiple
ontologies, XML Schemas, etc., in a labelled fashion, so that a
knowledgeable agent might decide which ontology, schema etc to use.

That is really it.



> I fully appreciate what RDDL tries to provide. I simply have not seen
> any evidence that it (a) solves the problem of determining which
> model to employ to interpret data or 

RDDL does not attempt to solve this specific problem. RDDL is simply
designed to allow an author to label a bunch of resources with attributes
named purpose and nature.

> (b) can be retrofitted successfully
> and broadly onto a web that does not use namespace name URIs to
> identify namespace documents.

RDDL allows anyone anywhere to type a namespace URI into any browser and get
back a document which describes a namespace. 

Jonathan
Received on Monday, 21 February 2005 15:25:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:32 GMT