W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webont-wg@w3.org > November 2002

Re: LANG: need to CLOSE Issue 5.6 Imports as magic syntax

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: 13 Nov 2002 12:15:00 -0600
To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Cc: Frank van Harmelen <Frank.van.Harmelen@cs.vu.nl>, www-webont-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <1037211301.22865.21884.camel@dirk>

On Wed, 2002-11-13 at 11:39, Dan Connolly wrote:
> > This answer is so important to me because I could not live with OWL if the
> > above scenario were not possible. Note: there is nothing fuzzy here 
> > concerning
> > trust, commitment, asserting-or-not, etc.
> On the contrary; in your own words, "I like the extension
> made at someURI2". That's a clear expression of trust, no?
> The only question is how to express that opinion to the machine.
> At my disposal, I have a variety of options.

I just remembered another option; one that make the trust
issues even more clear:

I maintain an index of URI schemes


it's not authoritative; it includes lots of stuff
from the authoritative registry, but also other stuff.

In March 2001, I started using Semantic Web techonolgies
to maintain it.

In particular, I have specific rules that import
specific statements from the IANA registry:

# The registry is trusted about certain properties...
  :trustedAbout dc:description, ws:schemeName, ws:specifies,
                ws:reserves, inet:rfc.


# If a document is trusted about some property, all
# statements whose predicate is that property are lifed
# into this context.
{ :doc :trustedAbout :p.
  :doc :says [
      log:includes { :s :p :o }
} log:implies { :s :p :o }.


-- http://www.w3.org/Addressing/scheme-registry-rules.n3

Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Wednesday, 13 November 2002 13:15:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:56:49 UTC