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

RE: Proposed response to Golbeck regarding imports issue

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 10:29:53 +0200
To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>, <connolly@w3.org>
Cc: <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <BHEGLCKMOHGLGNOKPGHDAELOCBAA.jjc@hpl.hp.com>


We have had had a request

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webont-comments/2003May/0119.html

to delete an unused namespace declaration from test SymmetricProperty 001.

[[
besides the fact that the namespace 'second' is not used,
]]

The discussion in this thread minds me to argue for not accepting this
request (at least not in full generality), but rather to deliberately leave
(at least some) usused namespace declarations in the test cases: where they
have no effect.

(Probably unlike the test highlighted by the commentator
http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-test/byFunction#function-SymmetricProperty
it would be more to the point to include them in negative entailment tests
for which Dan's reading of namespaces would result in the entailment).

From
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/ftf2.html

[[
RESOLUTION: The meaning of an OWL document is conveyed in the RDF graph
==> ALL in favour, NO opposed

RESOLUTION: All RDF/XML documents that are equivalent under the RDF
Recommendation are equivalent OWL exchange documents
==> 14 in favor -- 3 opposed

RESOLUTION: The exchange language for OWL is RDF/XML
==> 16 in favour
]]

not one word about xmlns:foo being significant.

Jeremy
Received on Tuesday, 17 June 2003 04:30:08 GMT

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