- From: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
- Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2018 02:43:01 -0500
- To: semantic-web@w3.org
- Cc: Jiří Procházka <ojirio@gmail.com>
On 11/25/18 12:32 PM, Jiří Procházka wrote: > having a vocabulary and semantics for > forwards compatible introduction of new semantic extensions could be > nice too (imagine in worst case of compatibility a tool alert "The > loaded document uses OWL-23-XYZ features which are not supported. Do you > still wish to proceed?"). Yes, that is a gap currently in the RDF standards. I remember noting that gap several years ago: http://dbooth.org/2010/ambiguity/paper.html#part3_2 "At present there is a minor gap in the RDF standards, in that there is no standard way for an RDF processor to recognize that a particular URI is intended to signal an opaque semantic extension: the knowledge of which URIs are intended to signal opaque semantic extensions must be externally supplied to the RDF processor. The RDF processor must magically know about them in advance. It cannot alert the user to the need for a new opaque semantic extension that was previously unknown. This gap could be addressed by defining a standard predicate, such as rdf2:requires, to explicitly indicate when a particular semantic extension is required." David Booth
Received on Monday, 26 November 2018 07:43:23 UTC