W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webont-wg@w3.org > August 2003

owl.owl => owl.rdf ?! [was: Re: review of wine.owl and food.owl]

From: Guus Schreiber <schreiber@cs.vu.nl>
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2003 13:00:40 +0200
Message-ID: <3F2F8E58.504@cs.vu.nl>
To: "Smith, Michael K" <michael.smith@eds.com>
CC: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>, www-webont-wg@w3.org

Smith, Michael K wrote:
> I am about cleaned up.  I assume the Guide reference text
> 
>  Note that in order to use the OWL vocabulary you do not need to
>  import the <a href="http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl">owl.owl</a>
>  ontology.  
> 
> should read
> 
>  Note that in order to use the OWL vocabulary you do not need to
>  import the <a href="http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl">owl</a>
>  ontology.  
> 
> Or should "owl" be "owl.rdf"?

My preference would be to change the suffix of the OWL schema from 
owl.owl to owl.rdf, as we are not requesting an separate owl mime type.

Guus



> 
> - Mike
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jeremy Carroll [mailto:jjc@hpl.hp.com] 
> Sent: Friday, July 25, 2003 7:00 AM
> To: www-webont-wg@w3.org
> Subject: review of wine.owl and food.owl
> 
> 
> 
> Mike please can you acknowledge receipt of this, otherwise I'll give you a 
> call later.
> 
> 
> Note:
> due to the tardiness of this review (which makes points that I don't recall 
> having previously made) I am happy for the editors to totally ignore the 
> suggestions - although on the first two I would defer to DanC and Sandro ...
> 
>  
> 1: Base location
> 
> It is an improvement that xml:base is used.
> I think it is probably more appropriate to use the base location that
> includes 
> the publication URI so e.g. for the current WD it would be
> 
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-owl-guide-20030331/wine#
> 
> and say the CR gets published 10 August it maybe
> 
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/CR-owl-guide-20030810/wine#
> 
> This is a bit of pain at publication time, but is probably better than the 
> implicit link off to the changing location
> 
>  "http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/guide-src/wine#"
> 
> 2: Changing suffix to .rdf
> 
> Given that we decided not to register a mime type I think we should be using
> 
> the .rdf suffix rather than a .owl suffix.
> 
> 3: (if doing 1)
> If you decide to follow the suggestion in point 1, then it may be helpful to
> 
> replace the namespace declarations with entity refs to minimize the points 
> of change.
> 
> e.g.
> <rdf:RDF
>   xmlns     = "&vin;"
>   xmlns:vin = "&vin;"
>   xml:base  = "&vin;"
>   xmlns:food= "&food;"
>   xmlns:owl = "&owl;"
>   xmlns:rdf = "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
>   xmlns:rdfs= "http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#"
>   >
> 
> 
> 4: making food.owl conform with OWL DL
> (I can't remember if we have already discussed this - if you have already 
> rejected this suggestion apologies for repeating myself)
> 
> food owl is not in OWL DL because it refers to the objects in the wine 
> ontology without giving them types e.g.
>   <owl:Class rdf:ID="Wine">
>     <owl:equivalentClass rdf:resource="&vin;Wine"/>
>   </owl:Class>
> 
> This can be rectified in three different ways:
> 
> a) easy way
>     import wine.owl from food.owl
> 
> b) harder way
>     include specifc type information in food.owl, e.g. above fragment
> becomes
> 
>   <owl:Class rdf:ID="Wine">
>     <owl:equivalentClass>
>          <owl:Class rdf:about="&vin;Wine"/>
>     </owl:equivalentClass>
>   </owl:Class>
> 
> c) very hard way
>    make a new file which just has the type information for both wine.owl and
> 
> food.owl and import them.
> 
> 5: delete xmlns:xsd="...." from wine.owl
> 
> This is not used 
> 
> 6. Keeping wine.owl in OWL DL - imports object
> 
> Food.owl declares its own URI to be of type owl:Ontology using the xml:base 
> and the idiom
>    <owl:Ontology rdf:about="">
> 
> The xml:base ends in a # which gets ignored when resolving the empty same 
> document reference, so that the subject of the rdf:type owl:Ontology triple 
> is the URIref
> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/guide-src/food
> 
> However the object of the owl:imports triple is
> 
> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/guide-src/food.owl
> 
> While the imports mechanism works, this uriref remains untyped and so the 
> document is in OWL Full.
> 
> Deleting the .owl suffix may work (it definitely will work if you use .rdf
> as 
> your suffix). 
> Including the suffix in both places will also work.
> 
> (I am still working on this review - there may be one or two more points)
>  
> Jeremy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

-- 
Free University Amsterdam, Computer Science
De Boelelaan 1081a, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Tel: +31 20 444 7739/7718
E-mail: schreiber@cs.vu.nl
Home page: http://www.cs.vu.nl/~guus/
Received on Tuesday, 5 August 2003 07:00:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:58:01 GMT