- From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2002 17:17:21 -0500
- To: "Tim Berners-Lee" <timbl@w3.org>
- cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
> However, I am not happy to make soemthing in which there is > a search path for a matching namespace. This is unbeliveably > prone to error in large systems. Oh yeah, I forgot about that problem. I was thinking there would be no ordering -- if a definition was found in more than one ontology, an error would be reported. If ontologies were well-behaved in never losing terms, this means at worst one's code would produce an error instead of the wrong results. Is that still too dangerous to provide to users? Another option is to have a processor which rewrites my suggested form into your suggested form. So you can be lazy when writing, run that processor, and thereafter you're immune to the changes you're worried about. (If you want to do lazy mods to the code, you should run the processor in another mode where it makes sure things are still the same way, before you make your mods.) > How about a sort of "import from"? > > @use text, pen, author, color <//http://address/of/one/ontology#>. > @use cost, total <//http://address/of/one/ontology2#>. > @keyword this, forall, forsome, a. > @prefix defualt http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/log. > > where the "use" and "keyword" cut out specific words, > leaving the rest to be from the default space. That's pretty nice. Why not have @keyword be @use for some namespace? Maybe we need to have that discussion about what exactly is "magic" syntax. I keep thinking we don't really need it. -- sandro
Received on Thursday, 7 March 2002 17:17:58 UTC