- From: wangxiao <wangxiao@musc.edu>
- Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 11:30:26 -0400
- To: <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>
> > Yes, the RDF/OWL file should be accessed from the ontologies' > > namespace. > > RDF's namespace differs from XML's. The latter only > promises a unique > > string (that is why XML has schemaLocation tag but not in > RDF) but the > > former promise a set of axioms. Another best practice suggestion. At least one of the targeted value of "rdfs:isDefinedBy" shall point to a resource that is HUMAN READABLE and offers explanation to the ontology in question. Rationale: Given an ontology, I don't think anyone is willing to go through the RDF/XML document and pickup the content from rdfs:comment or dc:description etc. tag. These tag will help an application to generate human readable document but it is designed for machine. Besides, there is no way to include graphics, which I think is very important to human communication as well. (It also the reason I devised the annotation language DLG2, which I submitted a manuscript to Journal of web semantics but not heard back yet).
Received on Friday, 30 September 2005 15:30:47 UTC