Re: LC: Opposing OWL/XML format

Michael Schneider wrote:
> [cc'in Ivan]
> 
> Bijan Parsia wrote:
> 
>>>> 3) If there were an XSLT published by the working group, would you be
>>>> satisfied even if it were not (easily) downloadable from the
>>>> namespace page?
>>> This sounds like a trick question.
>> It's not. I sounds like you aren't familiar with GRDDL or this issue.
>> Believe me there have been REAMS of discussion on it :)
>>
>>> I think the answer is yes, but I
>>> can't imagine why
>>> under normal conditions it couldn't be downloadable.
>> *From the namespace page*. I.e., if you dereference "http://
>> www.w3.org/2002/07/owl" do you get this XSLT. I'm very much opposed
>> to that. That's the normal case with GRDDL.
> 
> I am getting owl.owl from there.
> 
> Would it work with standard GRDDL aware tools to get an XSLT from there, when there is also an RDF/XML file at the same location?
> 

From a GRDDL perspective, _if_ the namespace document (say, an XML file,
including a possibility for XHTML) includes the necessary GRDDL
mechanism to yield an XSLT transform, then, well, it has it and will use it.

'GRDDL mechanism' means that the XML file contains the GRDDL attributes to

- generate an RDF on its own right (just as for any GRDD-able XML)
- the generated RDF contains triplets to get to the XSLT transform for
the original data that started the process via a namespace URI

So yes, indeed, I see two different issues here that are interrelated...

1. Putting the OWL/XML and GRDDL issue aside, the question is _what_
should be at the http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl URI. What format (XHTML
or RDF) and, if RDF, what should that contain.
2. Because the _same_ URI is used both for the OWL/XML namespace in the
XML sense and for the URI prefix for the OWL case, we may hit some
problems with the clashes indeed

I could imagine a solution whereby the URI would point at an XHTML+RDFa
file that also has the GRDDL mechanism in it. It would then generate the
address for the OWL/XML GRDDL transform for GRDDL processors, it would
be a human readable file in XHTML and one could generate (or make a
system generate) a corresponding RDF file for RDF viewers with some
basic information about OWL. A bit convoluted, but would probably leave
all processing intact.

We could also, ehem, ehem:-) reverse our earlier decision on the OWL/XML
namespace and separate it into another URI. That would mean a clean
separation for GRDDL processing.

Ivan




> Not that I propose to have some owl2.owl there later, but if several resources are going to compete, I would hardly expect to find there the XSLT of a the OWL/XML syntax at the first place. Rather some information about OWL, perhaps with the data in this information page also available in RDF form.
> 
> Probably, this will be some issue that needs to be resolved: What will be at that URL after OWL 2 is finished?
> 
> Michael
> 
> --
> Dipl.-Inform. Michael Schneider
> Research Scientist, Dept. Information Process Engineering (IPE)
> Tel  : +49-721-9654-726
> Fax  : +49-721-9654-727
> Email: schneid@fzi.de
> WWW  : http://www.fzi.de/ipe/eng/mitarbeiter.php?id=555
> 
> ============================================================================
> 
> FZI Forschungszentrum Informatik an der Universität Karlsruhe
> Haid-und-Neu-Str. 10-14, D-76131 Karlsruhe
> Tel.: +49-721-9654-0, Fax: +49-721-9654-959
> Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts
> Stiftung Az: 14-0563.1 Regierungspräsidium Karlsruhe
> Vorstand: Prof. Dr.-Ing. Rüdiger Dillmann, Dipl. Wi.-Ing. Michael Flor,
> Prof. Dr. rer. nat. Dr. h.c. Wolffried Stucky, Prof. Dr. rer. nat. Rudi
> Studer
> Vorsitzender des Kuratoriums: Ministerialdirigent Günther Leßnerkraus
> 
> ============================================================================
> 

-- 

Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf