Re: Guide: draft of Oct 31 from Mike Dean on 2002-10-31 (www-webont-wg@w3.org from October 2002)

From: Mike Dean <mdean@bbn.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 17:59:12 -0500
To: "Smith, Michael K" <michael.smith@eds.com>
cc: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>, www-webont-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <200210312259.RAA14709@cam-mbx1.bbn.com>

> > PS: In general, I think that OWL should completely avoid rdf:ID, instead
> >     using RDF:about.
>
> Should the Guide suggest this as good practice?

I prefer the use of rdf:ID to detect duplicates, and
recommend it to others.

I'd like to continue to see rdf:ID used in the Guide and
examples when "introducing" new classes and properties.  The
current usage with daml:Class in food.owl and wine.owl look
good to me.

Also, I try to avoid using owl:Thing, where possible, since
it generates extra meaningless triples and interferes with
tools like the OWL Validator [1] that help identify URI
typos.  I prefer using rdf:Description with rdf:about
instead.

	Mike

[1] http://owl.bbn.com/validator/

Received on Thursday, 31 October 2002 18:00:10 UTC