Re: description-logic/consistency605

On Sat, 13 Sep 2003, Jos De_Roo wrote:

>
>
> Jeremy:
> > Charles:
> > > Note the two instances of /2002/07/owl#FunctionalProperty - is that
> correct?
> > > I don't think so.
> > > I would be surprised if anyones parser would pass this.
> >
> >  </rdfs:subPropertyOf>
> >   <rdf:type rdf:resource="/2002/07/owl#FunctionalProperty"/>
> >  </owl:ObjectProperty>
> >  <owl:ObjectProperty rdf:about="http://oiled.man.example.net/test#rxa"/>
> >  <owl:ObjectProperty rdf:about="http://oiled.man.example.net/test#rx">
> >   <rdf:type rdf:resource="/2002/07/owl#FunctionalProperty"/>
> >  </owl:ObjectProperty>
> >
> > > Can someone in the know check this out?
> >
> >
> > Technically these are fine.
> >
> > The form /2002/07/owl#FunctionalProperty is a relative URI which resolves
>
> > against the base URI of
> > http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/description-logic/consistent605
> >
> > as
> > http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#FunctionalProperty
> >
> > I agree these forms are surpising, we could modify
> > http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-test/#style
> > appendix B stylistic preferences,
> > perhaps by adding a sentence to section B.2 on xml:base e.g.
> >
> > [[
> > Relative URIs used in the tests should not begin with "/" or ".".
> > ]]
> >
> > If we agreed that then the change to description-logic-605 and and other
> > affected tests would be editorial.
> >
> > Anyone else have an opinion.
>
> As it is right now, it works for me (thanks to HP Jena and W3C Cwm).

I have no trouble parsing these.

	Sean

> --
> Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/
>
>
>

-- 
Sean Bechhofer
seanb@cs.man.ac.uk
http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~seanb