>On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 6:12 AM, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> wrote: [...] >> Another alternative is to define a completely separate namespace for >> extra RDF stuffs, but I am not sure that is nice... What about "rdfx:"? (Analog to "javax".) This namespace would still be under the control of the W3C, but would allow different working groups to put stuff there, if it conceptually matches RDF(S)... or if these working groups simply cannot settle on a winner. ;-) I assume that all three parties (OWL, RIF, and RDF people) could pretty well live with this solution. Now that I think about this idea, I wonder if it would have been a better idea to put RDF reification and collections under such an "rdfx" namespace, too... Cheers, Michael
Received on Wednesday, 9 July 2008 19:11:47 UTC