RE: ISSUE-67 use of reification in mapping rules is unwise (axiom annotation)


>I previously proposed to use a shadow vocabulary instead. At that time,
>this suggestion did not receive a lot of applause. And yes, it would really
>be just a kind of "cultural workaround", leaving most of the technical
>problems as they are. However, the backward issue mentioned above would be
>by this approach, which is really worth thinking about it, I suppose!

Of course, the backwards compatibility issue would *not* automatically go
away by replacing RDF reification with a shadow vocabulary. Such an approach
would only make it easier to allow RDF reification for custom usage, because
such a use would then not collide with the use of reification as syntax

The current situation is that *all* RDF vocabulary is disallowed in the WDs,
regardless whether some RDF URI is used as OWL 2 syntax or not. So we
actually have this backward compatibility issue, independently on the
question, how axiom annotations are encoded. But this is a different issue
from ISSUE-67, of course.


Received on Monday, 14 July 2008 11:28:36 UTC