Hey, guys. It is perfectly fine to use OWL properties in RDF. The RDF
specs actually encourage this kind of semantic borrowing, it was
always part of the RDF design to have this happen. So no need to have
a version of owl:sameAs in the RDFS namespace. Just use the OWL one.
Pat
On Jul 1, 2010, at 4:54 PM, Paul Gearon wrote:
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 1:18 PM, Nathan <nat...@webr3.org> wrote:
<snip/>
Something else that keeps coming up, a subset of owl always comes
in to
conversations, obviously owl:sameAs - there was a proposal from one
Jim
Hendler [1] at a RDF workshop thing to perhaps do something about
moving
these up a level to RDFS.
[1] http://www.w3.org/2009/12/rdf-ws/papers/ws31
Didn't seem to get much feedback or thoughts (afaik), but given the
climate
perhaps it's worth giving some strong consideration to as a
community.
(Or just doing because it's a bloody good idea & would remove OWL
from
virtually every conversation we end up having).
I agree with this. In particular, I'd love to see an equivalent to
owl:sameAs in the rdfs namespace, probably with a more intuitive name,
like rdfs:equals. It would take OWL out of a lot of conversations.
There weren't any accepted proposals for working on RDFS at the
workshop, but that doesn't mean it can't still be done. However, it
would need a lot of public support if this were to be considered. If
people are interested, they should voice their opinions.
Regards,
Paul Gearon
------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973
40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office
Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax
FL 32502 (850)291 0667 mobile
phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
