- 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