- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2007 14:29:10 +0000
- To: "Web Ontology Language ((OWL)) Working Group WG" <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
Looking at last week's minutes, I see that I missed the final discussion concerning xinclude. Please can someone give a partisan and biased account of: a) what's wrong with owl:imports and b) why xinclude fixes it (My gut feel is that this seems like unnecessary change, but since I don't understand the motivations, I thought I should ask before a knee-jerk disagreement!) Background: HP's Jena software implements owl:imports, and this has been widely used and largely unproblematic, so we are surprised to hear that there is something sufficiently wrong to require a redesign, rather than a minor rewording. (However, the HP implementation has additional features over-and-above the recommended behaviour, and so our experience may not be representative or relevant). Thanks Jeremy
Received on Thursday, 22 November 2007 14:29:57 UTC