- From: Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>
- Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2009 15:37:52 -0500
- To: public-owl-comments@w3.org
(My apologies for continuing to dribble these in. If you want me to stop, or to send my LC comments elsewhere, please let me know.) The mapping to RDF draft says: An RDF syntax ontology document is any sequence of octets accessible from some given IRI that can be parsed into an RDF graph, and that then be transformed into an OWL 2 ontology by the canonical parsing process instantiated as specified in this section. You can't parse octets to RDF unless you know the media type and the character encoding. Therefore you must say that an ontology document is a triple {media type, character encoding, octet sequence}, or something else that has enough information to enable parsing. This tuple would correspond to what HTTP calls an "entity" and what webarch calls a "representation". The section is called "Mapping from RDF graphs" so I don't even know why a document is required. Why not just specify a mapping from RDF graphs? You are already blurring the distinction between "ontology" and "ontology document" (I take the latter as a "representation" of the ontology according to webarch, since you're using the same URI to "identify" both), so this should be easy. Best Jonathan
Received on Sunday, 1 February 2009 20:41:07 UTC