- From: Nathan <nathan@webr3.org>
- Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2010 22:57:14 +0100
- To: Paul Gearon <gearon@ieee.org>
- CC: Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>, Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>
swapping subject as I know a lot are simply ignoring the previous thread and this should be considered separately ;) Paul Gearon wrote: > On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 1:18 PM, Nathan <nathan@webr3.org> wrote: > > <snip/> >> Something else that keeps coming up, a subset of owl always comes in to >> conversations, obviously owl:sameAs - there was a proposal from one Jim >> Hendler [1] at a RDF workshop thing to perhaps do something about moving >> these up a level to RDFS. >> >> [1] http://www.w3.org/2009/12/rdf-ws/papers/ws31 >> >> Didn't seem to get much feedback or thoughts (afaik), but given the climate >> perhaps it's worth giving some strong consideration to as a community. >> >> (Or just doing because it's a bloody good idea & would remove OWL from >> virtually every conversation we end up having). > > I agree with this. In particular, I'd love to see an equivalent to > owl:sameAs in the rdfs namespace, probably with a more intuitive name, > like rdfs:equals. It would take OWL out of a lot of conversations. > > There weren't any accepted proposals for working on RDFS at the > workshop, but that doesn't mean it can't still be done. However, it > would need a lot of public support if this were to be considered. If > people are interested, they should voice their opinions. > > Regards, > Paul Gearon > >
Received on Thursday, 1 July 2010 21:58:24 UTC