- From: RDF Working Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 08 Oct 2013 13:28:14 +0000
- To: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
RDF-ISSUE-151: LC comment: owl:imports and graph names and issue 38 [RDF Concepts]
http://www.w3.org/2011/rdf-wg/track/issues/151
Raised by: Guus Schreiber
On product: RDF Concepts
Comment by Jeremy Carroll:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-comments/2013Jul/0022.html
This is a formal comment on RDF Concepts 1.1
I am concerned that the resolution of issue 38 leaves a disconnect.
In particular, I think it is common practice to have datasets
<g1> {
<g1> rdf:type owl:Ontology
}
<g2> {
<g2> rdf:type owl:Ontology ;
owl:imports <g1> .
}
and this practice is somewhat undermined by the resolution of issue-38 which leaves a disconnect (^sd:name sd:graph) between the name and the graph.
Received on Tuesday, 8 October 2013 13:28:18 UTC