- From: Matthew Pocock <matthew.pocock@ncl.ac.uk>
- Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 10:59:59 +0000
- To: public-owl-dev@w3.org
Hi, I've been browsing arround the OWL 1.1 draft spec. It's much more readable than the 1.0 spec. The UML diagrams realy help me. Where would I send any typos I find? Axiom is associated with annotations, which is great. Would it be possible to associate an optional URI with every axiom? This would allow tools to uniquely 'pull out' an axiom from an ontology without needing to know its structural identity. This is specifically intended to provide a mechanism for axiom naming/identification that stands seperate from and orthogonal to concept naming. The use-cases I have are allong the following sorts of lines: * An application is working with an ontology, and selects some axioms that it wishes to mark as interesting. It places their URIs into a message that gets sent to a server. The server also contains a copy of the same ontology, and using the URIs, it now knows which axioms the client is interested in. A variation on this theme is where there are several ontologies (or just axiom sets) in an application, and parts of each one are aggregated by URI reference into a merged axiom set. * An ontology is being commented on in a blog/wiki/[insert own external document here], and the author wishes to comment on a specific axiom in the ontology. They can write down the full URI of that axiom and comment on it cleanly, without needing to duplicate it or refer to the concept it contributes to. * During versioning, axioms are added or removed from a concept. It is necisary to keep track of this, and to annotate the axioms themselves with the rational for editing them, in addition to any comments on the concepts. However, this information is held in a bug-tracking or source versioning application, not within the OWL-XML. Best practice would, I guess, be to define an xml namespace prefix for axiom URIs that is distinct from the xml namespace prefix for the concepts introduced. It would probably be very important for people working with these things to keep axiom URIs seperate from concept URIs just for the sake of sanity. Also, it would be unfortunate if the axiom URI xml attribute name clashed with the concept URI xml attribute name. Matthew
Received on Monday, 22 January 2007 20:25:59 UTC