- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 04:09:00 -0500 (EST)
- To: hendler@cs.rpi.edu
- Cc: public-owl-wg@w3.org
My view is that the need for roundtripping is even greater because RDF/XML is the only normative exchange syntax. Consider, for example, a source (e.g., a GUI for ontology building) that generates ontologies in some syntax other than RDF/XML, in particular one that is much closer to the abstract or functional-style syntaxes. It is vital that these ontologies can be translated back into a form close to the one in which they were generated. Consider, for example, changing an ontology using a GUI that internally utilizes a non-RDF/XML syntax and then putting the revised version back up on the web. Round-tripping helps in minimizing the number of changed triples, allowing easier detection of what has changed. Peter F. Patel-Schneider Bell Labs Research From: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.rpi.edu> Subject: Re: ISSUE-2 (allDisjoint-RDF): No syntax for AllDisjoint in RDF mapping Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 21:25:19 -0500 > I've never understood why roundtripping would be positive, some day > someone will explain this to me (since the original document is still > on the Web and has a URI, I can always find it, so why do I need to > reproduce it) ... but thst's not my point [...] > I am now on the advisory board of the EOL project where exactly this > issue has come up again --- so since I'm not chair and am allowed to > push an opinion - I think we MUST include a construct to avoid having > to make the N^^2 statements in the RDF/XML documents (Which remain > the normative exchange syntax for OWL) > -JH
Received on Tuesday, 13 November 2007 09:22:05 UTC