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

> Jim (and others)
> 
> Those of you who read my discussion with Tim should realize that the
> solution he proposed was that if a document mentions a term from a
> namespace, that the statements from that namespace should be merged with
> the document when processing (essentially this an implict imports). I
> admitted that in the example I described, this would work (but only as a
> workaround, it would force people to design ontologies in a certain way
> to take advanatage of this behavior). Note, though to have any semantic
> interoperability, this behavior would have to be stated as <em>part of
> our semantics.<em> If we chose to do this, then it would also have the
> side effect that we would then not be able to add on the ability to
> "import parts of ontologies" because by default, simply mentioning a
> term from an ontology implicitly imports the whole thing.

While an easy and effective trick, I would be uncomfortable with Tim's solution. 
This has been already touched on in 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Sep/0456.html

-M