W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > January 2006

Re: Announcement: Firefox Navibar Extension 0.10

From: <siebeneicher@oaklett.org>
Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 08:18:20 +0100
Message-ID: <43C0BCBC.2090203@oaklett.org>
To: semantic-web@w3.org

Jeremy Wong 黃泓量 wrote:

> Why do you use the IRI "urn:sitemap:root" as the starting-point of your 
> software's navigation? I think you should use the "rdfs:Class" facility 
> instead of defining the use of any specific IRI...

The short answer is, that i never mentioned exactly this question.

The long answer is, that during writing of the specification i thought 
of using OWL as theoreticaly the best format to represent the ontology 
of a website. Unfortunately Firefox do not supprt any OWL or RDFS and 
instead i decide to use simple RDF. It was only of practical reasons 
that i chose RDF. (Yes, RDF and RDFS could be combined, but at the time 
of writing i want a strict separation)

I know that the NNS format has some faults and from my point of view NNS 
is not intended to be an official standard format for the internet 
although it has some interesting ideas. For example the "container" and 
"embedded" elements which complements each other. If any container or 
emebedded element would be named like a Class is namend in RDFS, it 
would be similar to RDFS but without using RDFS.

To my regret, i do not know much of the current OWL/RDFS/RDF/... trends 
and on going works. So, please tell me what practical advantage users 
and programms(or programmers) would have if the format would use 
rdfs:Class instead of the IRI "urn:sitemap:root" to define the starting 
point of the Sitemaps graph.

Received on Sunday, 8 January 2006 07:19:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 5 July 2022 08:44:55 UTC