- From: Jonathan Borden <jonathan@openhealth.org>
- Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2002 08:21:23 -0400
- To: "Jeff Heflin" <heflin@cse.lehigh.edu>, "WebOnt" <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
Jeff Heflin wrote: > > c) Parse each ontology into its RDF graph, merge the graphs, and then > apply the semantics to the merged graphs. I don't think I've heard > anyone advocate this approach yet. > > d) Do inclusion at the RDF/XML syntax level. Methods for doing this have > been proposed by Mike Smith [4] and Raphael Volz [5]. > What is the essential difference between these approaches, except for the mechanics? In both cases, you get a "merged" RDF graph to which the semantics apply. In (d) you either have to use existing RDF/XML parsers and their already existing mechanisms for inclusion, or write a non-standard parser that has a non-standard mechanism for inclusion -- I really don't think we need to get into the business of writing OWL parsers do we? In (c) we simply use the current RDF/XML parsers and then in a post-parse transformation step, merge the parsed graphs into a single graph. That seems pretty straightforward to me. *** In either case, the semantics doesn't need to give a hoot of consideration to where the triples came from. Jonathan *** this might count as the first advocation for this approach
Received on Friday, 20 September 2002 08:38:58 UTC