owl:imports vs xinclude

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