Re: Ambiguity of "RDF namespace" - was: Re: Contradicting definitions of "property"

Hi Sandro,

On 5 May 2012, at 02:06, Sandro Hawke wrote:
>> If the term "namespace" is being used in normative specifications for RDF, I
>> should think it would need also to be defined there, but I guess a separate
>> Glossary would do the trick.  It could provide a place to clarify other
>> troublesome concepts in an informal, readable way, especially where there is a
>> *ahem* "range of opinions" among reasonable experts.  For starters, how about
>> "ontology"?  Is it really a document I can print out and staple to the wall?
>> Then point to the Glossary from the RDF documents...
> 
> It seems to me that "RDF Concepts" is where I'd look for this kind of
> thing, not some separate Glossary document.   Maybe Glossary appendix to
> Concepts.    

Ok — we'll think about it.

> But it's a very slippery slope --

I know! The document should define terminology, but shouldn't get into best practices or that kind of stuff. There is a risk here that it starts duplicating too much stuff that is said better elsewhere, and that it tries to do the job of the Primer.

Best,
Richard



> I know I'd be very
> tempted to throw some Linked Data advice in there.   A namespace IRI
> doesn't necessarily denote anything in particular, but the Linked Data
> principles could be read as saying dereferencing the namespace IRI
> SHOULD give you some useful information about the namespace and the
> names in it.  I don't think I would read them that way, but it will
> occur to some people and they could use some guidance.  I'm just not
> sure we're the right people to give that guidance right now.
> 
>    -- Sandro
> 
> 
> 
> 
>

Received on Tuesday, 8 May 2012 22:26:48 UTC