- From: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.umd.edu>
- Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 08:52:47 -0400
- To: Sean Bechhofer <seanb@cs.man.ac.uk>
- Cc: webont <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
I'm breaking my reply to Sean into two parts - this one about the owl:imports test, a separate one (echoing Jeremy) on the blank nodes in the intersection >In the premises document, the triple: > ><rdf:Description rdf:about=''> > <owl:imports >rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/imports/support001-A"/> ></rdf:Description> > >uses owl:imports without explicitly saying that the URI to which it >applies is an owl:Ontology. Thus we are in Full. I think we have room for improvement here - Mike, who is very up on our documents, naturally assumed that the reason this test was in full had to do with the imports, not with the missing owl:Ontology statement. As a result, he was assuming that he had missed something in how imports works. I can see two easy fixes: 1 - add the owl:ontology statement into this example and call this a Lite test 2 - leave this test as it is, but add another test that is exactly the same except adds the owl:ontology statement (and is thus in Lite) I would strongly advocate the latter - this would make need for owl:Ontology in an imports clear, and it would make it clear that the imported stuff DOES need to be considered by a species checker (this was the confusion caused by the current test alone). Jeremy, Jos - what do you think of adding a new test that mirrors http://www.w3.org/2002/03owlt/imports/Manifest001 but adds the owl:Ontology statement per Sean's message above -- would be an easy additional test, and would clarify a couple of subtleties in the OWL design. -JH
Received on Wednesday, 27 August 2003 10:58:32 UTC