- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2008 06:48:29 -0400 (EDT)
- To: alanruttenberg@gmail.com
- Cc: public-owl-wg@w3.org
From: "Alan Ruttenberg" <alanruttenberg@gmail.com> Subject: Re: ISSUE-137 (including XML includes) Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2008 06:11:59 -0400 > Hi Peter, > > Thanks for the summary of the problem, which addresses my > understanding of the issue. The idea of having an inclusion mechanism > in addition to imports seems like a reasonable idea and I would > support such a move in general. However the proposal to link it to XML > raises issues - there are different serializations of RDF and it is > preferable to have a solution that is independent of a particular > serialization, as others have pointed out in different discussions > earlier in the working group. In addition the use of the general power > of XInclude and XPointer seems like substantially more than what is > needed here, and may impose implementation burden as the technology is > not afaik, not widely deployed. One benefit of using XML include is that it is a pre-existing W3C recommendation. It may be that XML include is not widely deployed, but doesn't its existence indicate that we should use it if at all possible? > I wonder if there might be a way to use a similar mechanism but > independent of the particular RDF serialization. I'm not sure why. Isn't RDF/XML *the* RDF serialization? > For example, could it > make sense to have an directive (ontology property in OWL) > owl:includesRDF and specify it's behavior only as part of the RDF > parsing? This seems a bit strange in that it would be a piece of OWL syntax that only works in a particular serialization. If it turns out that XML includes is not suitable, then I think that it would be better to employ something like the core syntax terms from the RDF/XML grammar. This would be a bit of RDF/XML syntax that required the inclusion, something like: ... <rdf:RDF ... include="http://example.org/o1.rdf"> ... </rdf:RDF The beauty of XML include is that it works somewhat this *and* that it happens underneath the RDF. The non-beauty of XML include is that it is more general than required and the include wanted is not a simple one. > -Alan peter
Received on Friday, 12 September 2008 10:49:17 UTC