- From: Smith, Michael K <michael.smith@eds.com>
- Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 13:39:44 -0500
- To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>, www-webont-wg@w3.org
An alternative to an error is an assertion. Consider treating the imports statement as a macro. Successful macro expansion pulls in the appropriate imported triples/XML. Plus it could add an assertion thisOntology owl:importSuccess http://www.example.com/ontology2.owl indicating that that ontology2 was pulled in. In order to make it simple to detect an incomplete importation chain we could provide thisOntology owl:importFailure http://www.example.com/ontology2.owl Just a thought. Of course this is really just a translation of the 404 error into something accessible to ontological reasoning. Fundamentally, the question is where in the processing layers this information should best be made available. An example of the use of such a feature would occur where you are importing many instances from all over the web based on entries in a database. You don't want processing to stop if one document is missing. But it might be handy to be able to count successes and failures and report those numbers. - Mike Michael K. Smith, Ph.D., P.E. EDS - Austin Innovation Centre 98 San Jacinto, #500 Austin, TX 78701 * phone: +01-512-404-6683 * mailto:michael.smith@eds.com -----Original Message----- From: Jeremy Carroll [mailto:jjc@hpl.hp.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2002 1:22 PM To: www-webont-wg@w3.org Subject: Re: importing and entialment > However, I believe an error condition is still better than just > saying "well let's assume the imports statement refers to an empty > document." Agreed. certainly a 404, or a 500 is an error - I was pedantically pointing out that being different they have different characteristics. I would always want to report such errors with some appropriate mechanism that an end user might eventually see. Jeremy
Received on Wednesday, 23 October 2002 14:39:52 UTC