- From: Peter Crowther <peter.crowther@networkinference.com>
- Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 10:22:28 -0000
- To: "'Sandro Hawke'" <sandro@w3.org>
- Cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
> From: Sandro Hawke [mailto:sandro@w3.org] > 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 problem is ontologies *gaining* terms - you might suddenly find that a previously well-behaved system fails simply because someone has introduced a term to an ontology that has an identical name to one you're already using (with its default name) in another ontology. This *will* happen on the Semantic Web, because people won't be as careful as we would wish about versioning and never replacing the contents of a particular URL. - Peter
Received on Friday, 8 March 2002 05:23:27 UTC