- From: Axel Polleres <axel.polleres@deri.org>
- Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 12:42:58 +0100
- To: "Ivan Herman" <ivan@w3.org>
- Cc: "Chimezie Ogbuji" <ogbujic@ccf.org>, "Birte Glimm" <birte.glimm@comlab.ox.ac.uk>, "SPARQL Working Group" <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On 25 May 2010, at 12:17, Ivan Herman wrote:
>
> On May 25, 2010, at 13:07 , Axel Polleres wrote:
>
>>> http://www.w3.org/ns/rif#imports
>>
>> I am not sure whether that flies... IMO there is a certain expectation from users
>> on namespace prefixes being used consistently, see e.g. http://prefix.cc/rif
>>
>> So, I am a bit unhappy if we hijack the rif: prefix for a new namespace URI.
>> Sorry about being picky here,
>>
>> Axel
>
> I can see the point. Any idea what we could/should use instead?
We have overall four alternatives, it seems:
1. (ab)using the rif: namespace, i.e. rif:imports: might be acceptable, we need to check with rif group.
concern: may be confusing, since recursive imports are not considered as RIF-RF combination semantics doesn't know about rif:imports
2. (ab)using the rdf: namespace, i.e. rdf:rif-imports.
potentially similar issues as 1?
3. use the sparql: namespace, which we need for functions etc. anyways... i.e. sparql:rifImports or sparql:rif-imports
pro: straightforward
con: it was raised earlier that this import mechanism may be useful/needed by others, so we shouldn't tie it to sparql.
4. use a new namespace *and* a new prefix, eg. rif2rdf:imports where
@prefix rif2rdf = <http://www.w3.org/ns/rif2rdf#imports>
<chair-hat off> My personal opinion:
While I am still worried a lot about the objection for 1. and fear objections against 2., I am starting to think about the objection against 3. with a bit more distance... why should we speculate about later reuse that is not yet there? In case, others are free to reuse sparql:rifImports.
- sceptical about 1.
- neutral about 2.
- in favor of 3.
- neutral about 4. (admittedly, I have no idea for a "sexy" prefix name, not entirely happy with rif2rdf: )
</chair-hat off>
Other expressions of preference?
Axel
>
> Ivan
>
>>
>>
>> On 21 May 2010, at 15:52, Chimezie Ogbuji wrote:
>>
>>> Okay, I've reverted back to this import URI, added an editorial note for the
>>> URI of entailment regime, added clarifying sentences in the editorial note
>>> regarding safety, and added additional references. I've also updated
>>> 'Finite Answer Set Conditions (Informative)' with additional information
>>> regarding safety as well.
>>>
>>> -- Chime
>>>
>>> On 5/21/10 10:05 AM, "Ivan Herman" <ivan@w3.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> http://www.w3.org/ns/rif#imports
>>>
>>>
>>> ===================================
>>>
>>> P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail
>>>
>>> Cleveland Clinic is ranked one of the top hospitals
>>> in America by U.S.News & World Report (2009).
>>> Visit us online at http://www.clevelandclinic.org for
>>> a complete listing of our services, staff and
>>> locations.
>>>
>>>
>>> Confidentiality Note: This message is intended for use
>>> only by the individual or entity to which it is addressed
>>> and may contain information that is privileged,
>>> confidential, and exempt from disclosure under applicable
>>> law. If the reader of this message is not the intended
>>> recipient or the employee or agent responsible for
>>> delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are
>>> hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or
>>> copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
>>> you have received this communication in error, please
>>> contact the sender immediately and destroy the material in
>>> its entirety, whether electronic or hard copy. Thank you.
>>>
>>
>
>
> ----
> 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
>
>
>
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 25 May 2010 11:43:33 UTC