- From: Smith, Michael K <michael.smith@eds.com>
- Date: Thu, 1 May 2003 08:23:42 -0500
- To: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>, public-webont-comments@w3.org
Thanks for your comments. I will get back to you soon with a detailed response. - Mike Michael K. Smith, Ph.D., P.E. EDS - Austin Innovation Centre 98 San Jacinto, #500 Austin, TX 78701 phone: +01-512-404-6683 email: michael.smith@eds.com -----Original Message----- From: Karl Dubost [mailto:karl@w3.org] Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2003 3:10 PM To: public-webont-comments@w3.org Subject: about/base and Free to implementations Comments about OWL Web Ontology Language Guide W3C Working Draft 31 March 2003 http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/WD-owl-guide-20030331/Overview.html * In the guide document on OWL, you have written : > The rdf:about attribute provides a name or reference for the >ontology. Where the value of the attribute is "", the standard case, >the name of the ontology is the base URI of the owl:Ontology >element. Typically, this is the URI of the document containing the >ontology. An exception to this is a context that makes use of >xml:base which may set the base URI for an element to something >other than the URI of the current document. What's happening in case of conflicts between xml:base and rdf:about? * You said > Tools will respond to this situation in an implementation >defined manner. Free to implementations is dangerous and leads to lack of interoperability. You should define what the implementation should do in this case. Return of a code, etc. -- Karl Dubost / W3C - Conformance Manager http://www.w3.org/QA/ --- Be Strict To Be Cool! ---
Received on Thursday, 1 May 2003 09:23:54 UTC