- From: Jeff Heflin <heflin@cse.lehigh.edu>
- Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2002 16:53:05 -0400
- To: Jonathan Borden <jonathan@openhealth.org>
- CC: WebOnt <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
Jonathan Borden wrote: > > Jeff Heflin wrote: > > > > Prior versions: > > ---------------- > > <url> priorVersion <url>. > > > > The second URL is an earlier version of the first. This has no meaning > > in the semantics, but could be used by software to organize ontologies > > by versions. Due to XML namespaces the identifiers in the two ontologies > > will be treated as distinct unless there are explicit statements of > > equivalence. Thus, the two ontologies can be merged without problems, > > although there will be no "integration" unless specific mappings are > > defined. > > I'm not groking the "Due to XML namespaces ..." part. Wouldn't any two > distinct URIrefs be treated as distinct unless there were statements of > equivalence? i.e. how do XML namespaces affect this? > > Jonathan Perhaps I didn't word that well. What I meant was that in RDF, different IDs in different documents are assumed to be in different namespaces. That is, if one ontology said: <Class ID="Car"> and another ontology said: <Class ID="Car"> then the default in RDF is to assume that these are two different classes. I view this as something RDF inherited from XML namespaces, but maybe that's not correct. Jeff
Received on Tuesday, 10 September 2002 16:53:08 UTC