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

Re: Proposed response to Golbeck regarding imports issue

From: Jeff Heflin <heflin@cse.lehigh.edu>
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 14:33:39 -0400
Message-ID: <3EEE0D83.C0EB95C@cse.lehigh.edu>
To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
CC: Guus Schreiber <schreiber@cs.vu.nl>, Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.umd.edu>, WebOnt <www-webont-wg@w3.org>

Hi Dan,

The text you want stricken is from the currently published Last Call
Working Draft, not from my proposed response. My proposal was to change
it to:

 > "Note that although owl:imports and namespace declarations may appear
 > redundant, they actually serve very different purposes. Namespace
 > declarations simply set up a shorthand for referring to identifiers.
 > They do not implicitly include the meaning of documents located at
the
 > URI (although some applications may choose to process these documents
in
 > addition to the original document). On the other hand, owl:imports
does
 > not provide any shorthand notation for referring to the identifiers
from
 > the imported document. Therefore, it is common to have a
corresponding
 > namespace declaration for any ontology that is imported."

Note that this makes it clear that other applications, such as the ones
you have built, are free to process the namespace documents. I hope this
text is more acceptable to you.

I will delay making any responses on the two imports messages until
we've had a chance to come to consensus.

Jeff

Dan Connolly wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 2003-06-16 at 10:08, Guus Schreiber wrote:
> [...]
> >  > "Note that the importing a document is different than creating a
> >  > namespace reference. owl:imports do not set up a shorthand notation for
> >  > names as does a namespace reference. On the other hand, the namespace
> >  > reference does not imply that all (or even any) ontological terms from
> >  > that namespace are being imported.
> 
> Oops! I must have missed that earlier.
> 
> Yes, namespace declarations do imply that ontological terms
> are being imported! At least in the tools that I build, they
> do. I don't mind if the WG doesn't endorse that position, but
> I do mind if the WG specifies that it's not so.
> 
> Please strike that text.
> 
> > > Therefore, it is common to have a
> >  > corresponding namespace declaration for any ontology that is
> >  > imported."
> 
> --
> Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Monday, 16 June 2003 14:33:51 GMT

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