Hi Pat, On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 9:52 PM, Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us> wrote: > Hey, guys. It is perfectly fine to use OWL properties in RDF. The RDF specs > actually encourage this kind of semantic borrowing, it was always part of > the RDF design to have this happen. So no need to have a version of > owl:sameAs in the RDFS namespace. Just use the OWL one. Yes, I know that borrowing terms is allowed. Indeed, it gets used every day. The thing is that we're talking about maybe cleaning RDF up a little. (emphasis on the "maybe" - though that's starting to look more likely). In this case, it makes sense to me that a term for equality would make it's way into RDFS, simply because there are a lot of use cases where people are sticking to just that namespace, with the single exception of owl:sameAs. Also from an aesthetics point of view, equality is such a common concept that I'm surprised it wasn't already lower in the stack. Nothing in RDF *needs* to be changed. But if it does get updated, then I think that it would be nice to clean things a little while all the new features get added (such as named graphs). Regards, Paul GearonReceived on Friday, 2 July 2010 05:30:25 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 5 July 2022 08:45:19 UTC