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

Re: Proposed response to Golbeck regarding imports issue

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: 16 Jun 2003 16:17:34 -0500
To: Jeff Heflin <heflin@cse.lehigh.edu>
Cc: Guus Schreiber <schreiber@cs.vu.nl>, Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.umd.edu>, WebOnt <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1055798254.27168.252.camel@dirk.dm93.org>

On Mon, 2003-06-16 at 13:33, Jeff Heflin wrote:
> 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.

Yes, that's quite nice.

Sorry to stir things up unnecessarily.

-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Monday, 16 June 2003 17:17:14 GMT

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