- From: Young,Jeff (OR) <jyoung@oclc.org>
- Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2011 10:19:06 -0400
- To: "Neubert Joachim" <J.Neubert@zbw.eu>, "Antoine Isaac" <aisaac@few.vu.nl>, <public-xg-lld@w3.org>
Joachim, I would agree there is utility to this. I can imagine using XML Schema with RDF/XML to constrain OWL model data into closed-world structures. When people use the word "Application Profile", that's the solution that pops into my brain. I suspect there are other possibilities, though, and wonder about them. Jeff > -----Original Message----- > From: public-xg-lld-request@w3.org [mailto:public-xg-lld- > request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Neubert Joachim > Sent: Friday, August 26, 2011 3:55 AM > To: Antoine Isaac; public-xg-lld@w3.org > Subject: AW: References to "application profiles" > > > I'm not saying that it was clearly worded here, far from it > > :-) I can also live with this point being mentioned in > > another section. But I wanted to warn against making this > > disappear, altogether. > > I agree with Antoine here - the concept of application profiles is > really important in library world (and bridges somehow the intellectual > gap between traditional record oriented thinking and freely floating > properties - OWL is no help for this). Therefore, in my eyes, it should > be in the report. > > Cheers, Joachim > >
Received on Friday, 26 August 2011 14:19:57 UTC