- From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2008 01:28:25 +0100
- To: OWL Working Group WG <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
Hiya, Sorry I missed last week. I'd like to put in a plea for reusing: http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl# everywhere possible, including the OWL/XML serialization format. As it stands, we often have way too many namespaces just to get off the ground (rdf, rdfs, owl, and xsd!). (I can't remember *any* of them.) Given that there will be absolutely no confusing qnames of elements and uris of properties and classes, I think we should default to minimizing extra syntactic noise. At the very least, I think we need a very strong argument or set of arguments, preferably grounded in reasonable common behavior. I saw from the minutes that some people suggested that people will click on the namespace. First, I don't think that's particularly common, anywhere. Second, I have no problem putting up RDDL document at the OWL namespace (indeed, that's where it should be). So I don't see that case is worth the tax of Yet Another OWL URI. Even if people do do it, it's typically seldom. Whereas managing several uris in headers is far more common (or if it isn't, then something has gone very wrong!) Cheers, Bijan.
Received on Tuesday, 3 June 2008 00:29:42 UTC