- 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