- From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
- Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2008 20:40:37 +0000
- To: "Web Ontology Language ((OWL)) Working Group WG" <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
Complete by this section: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Imports#Bijan. 27s_Scenario:_Generating_Variants Which is indicated with this diff: http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/index.php? title=Imports&diff=2537&oldid=2325 It's a bit chatty, but I thought it better to put it on the page rather than letting it get lost in email. It's more reactiony than polemical. The take away I see is that I guess I can live, for that scenario, with having to harmonize names and imports. It seems *pointless*, but it's one more pointless bit of pain in OWL and probably not enough to put me over the edge :) Personally, I think, on the Web, that the ID of the ontology (in the ontology construct) is pretty meaningless and pointless. I really hate unspecified, out of band solutions. I don't want to learn and relearn how to configure my environment, esp. since I tend to use multiple tools (including the Pellet command line, online tools, etc.). xinclude is looking pretty good to me :) Fallbacking is nice: http://www.w3.org/TR/xinclude/#fallback.org/ Cheers, Bijan.
Received on Monday, 7 January 2008 20:38:44 UTC