W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > October 2007

Re: Is ontology an information resource?

From: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>
Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2007 11:11:46 -0400
Message-Id: <B14CF70A-80B0-4A37-804E-625A0681DD6B@w3.org>
Cc: semantic-web@w3.org
To: Yoshio Fukushige <fukushige.yoshio@jp.panasonic.com>

On 2007-10 -14, at 23:39, Yoshio Fukushige wrote:

> Hi all,
> I (still again?) have some problems in my attempt to publish an  
> ontology on the Web.
> So please let me solve them by giving your advices.
> Let me ask questions one by one, for some of them might be  
> automatically solved by
> preceding answers.
> My first question is as follows
> QUESTION:  Is an ontology an information resource or non- 
> information resource?


> Reto Bahmann-Gmür said in his message[1] an ontology can be seen as
> an information resource, and Tim BL said in his message[2]
> [[
> when any term in that namespace S looked up, it is the
> document <http://ont.example.org/myOnt/example> which is dereference.
> That resource is the ontology.
> ]].
> So it seems there is a consensus that an ontology is an information  
> resource.
> In "Best Practice Recipes for Publishing RDF Vocabularies"[3],  
> however,
> Recipe 3, 4, 5 shows
> that a Client will receive a 303 response for a request for  
> 'vocabulary URI',

No -- I think you have misread it. The document shows a 303 for a a  
request for a TERM IN the ontology. A class or property, for example.

Not for the ontology. The ontology returns 200.

But you should hash URIs for normal ontologies.  They are simpler and  
faster at run time, and are served up just be writing a file and  
serving it up.

Tim Berners-Lee
Received on Sunday, 21 October 2007 15:12:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 5 July 2022 08:45:03 UTC