“#" has a very specific meaning as a separator between a resource identifier and a subordinate resource identifier with respect to the primary resource. And as Richard said there are plenty of views wrt it’s use in general.
WRT HTTP dereferencing, Cool URIs for the Semantic Web explains: “When a client wants to retrieve a hash URI, then the HTTP protocol requires the fragment part to be stripped off before requesting the URI from the server.” So, the # (and what follows if anything) is not considered part of “the URI” as far as HTTP is concerned. Also, it’s very rare to see an *ontology* URI ending in #, Others may be able to produce examples but off the top of my head, I cannot think of any any customer, industry or standard ontology built that way. IMO best practice is to not use # as the final character in a URI for an ontology. That said, if you find one done that way it’s probably not worth trying to “fix”. BTW same for “/“ at the end of the ontology URI. Cheers, David UK +44 7788 561308 US +1 336 283 0606 > On 26 Oct 2017, at 14:19, Richard Cyganiak <[email protected]> wrote: > > Should one add a # to the ontology URI or not? > > Attempting to answer this question would get us dangerously close to wading > into the quagmire that is httpRange-14 [1]. > > I am going to say that it doesn’t matter. I recommend doing whatever you > like, and being tolerant of those who do it the other way. > > Richard > > > [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTPRange-14 > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTPRange-14> > > > >> On 26 Oct 2017, at 13:56, Bohms, H.M. (Michel) <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> Pfffffft, >> Thx again >> >> >> What’s left is, one step back, when to do what? >> Ie when the sh approach (with #-naming) and when the uri-approach (with >> no-#-naming). >> Pros/cons, consistency, best practice ….. >> >> >> >> >> >> Dr. ir. H.M. (Michel) Böhms >> Senior Data Scientist >> >> T +31888663107 >> M +31630381220 >> E [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> Location >> <https://www.google.com/maps/place/TNO+-+Locatie+Delft+-+Stieltjesweg/@52.000788,4.3745183,17z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0x47c5b58c52869997:0x56681566be3b8c88!8m2!3d52.000788!4d4.376707> >> >> >> <image001.gif> <http://www.tno.nl/> >> This message may contain information that is not intended for you. If you >> are not the addressee or if this message was sent to you by mistake, you are >> requested to inform the sender and delete the message. TNO accepts no >> liability for the content of this e-mail, for the manner in which you use it >> and for damage of any kind resulting from the risks inherent to the >> electronic transmission of messages. >> >> >> >> >> From: [email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]> >> [mailto:[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>] On Behalf Of Richard Cyganiak >> Sent: donderdag 26 oktober 2017 14:53 >> To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: [topbraid-users] shacl rule inference >> >> On 26 Oct 2017, at 12:47, Bohms, H.M. (Michel) <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> Your fully right…can I conclude that because >> >> In shacle doc it says: >> “ >> @prefix sh: <http://www.w3.org/ns/shacl# <http://www.w3.org/ns/shacl>> . >> sh: >> a owl:Ontology ; >> “ >> >> that in this special case (that the # is added to the ontology name)the “sh: >> prefix” in my ontology goes fine. >> >> Exactly! >> >> Richard >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Thx for your patience…. >> >> (up till now I had not opened the shacl doc itself assuming wrongly that # >> would not be part of the name…) >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Dr. ir. H.M. (Michel) Böhms >> Senior Data Scientist >> >> >> T +31888663107 >> M +31630381220 >> E [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> Location >> <https://www.google.com/maps/place/TNO+-+Locatie+Delft+-+Stieltjesweg/@52.000788,4.3745183,17z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0x47c5b58c52869997:0x56681566be3b8c88!8m2!3d52.000788!4d4.376707> >> >> >> <image001.gif> <http://www.tno.nl/> >> This message may contain information that is not intended for you. If you >> are not the addressee or if this message was sent to you by mistake, you are >> requested to inform the sender and delete the message. TNO accepts no >> liability for the content of this e-mail, for the manner in which you use it >> and for damage of any kind resulting from the risks inherent to the >> electronic transmission of messages. >> >> >> >> >> From: [email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]> >> [mailto:[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>] On Behalf Of Richard Cyganiak >> Sent: donderdag 26 oktober 2017 13:33 >> To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: [topbraid-users] shacl rule inference >> >> I gave ruletry as an example. I explained why the URI for importing ruletry >> has no # at the end while SHACL has a # at the end, and that therefore >> ruletry cannot be abbreviated while SHACL can be abbreviated. >> >> I can only explain it for you. You’ll have to do the understanding yourself >> ;-) >> >> Richard >> >> >> >> >> On 26 Oct 2017, at 12:20, Bohms, H.M. (Michel) <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> The whole issue wasn’t about importing ruletry somewhere else, it was about >> the current use of the prefix sh: in the import clause of my ruletry >> ontology (as automatically generated when creating a shacle shape and >> unticking the dash import). >> >> So simply: >> >> Is: >> >> # baseURI: http://example.org/ruletry <http://example.org/ruletry> >> # imports: http://www.w3.org/ns/shacl# <http://www.w3.org/ns/shacl> >> # prefix: ruletry >> >> @prefix owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl# >> <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl>> . >> @prefix rdf: <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns# >> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns>> . >> @prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema# >> <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema>> . >> @prefix ruletry: <http://example.org/ruletry# <http://example.org/ruletry>> . >> @prefix sh: <http://www.w3.org/ns/shacl# <http://www.w3.org/ns/shacl>> . >> @prefix xsd: <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema# >> <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema>> . >> >> <http://example.org/ruletry <http://example.org/ruletry>> >> rdf:type owl:Ontology ; >> owl:imports sh: ; >> owl:versionInfo "Created with TopBraid Composer" ; >> . >> >> Ok or not (the red part)? >> >> When you started the feedback it seemed you said “yes this is perfectly >> fine”, your latest feedback seems to say “no not fine to use sh: prefix for >> import clause (because of the extra #). >> Anyway, I am confused 😊 >> >> Greetings Michel >> >> >> >> Dr. ir. H.M. (Michel) Böhms >> Senior Data Scientist >> >> >> >> T +31888663107 >> M +31630381220 >> E [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> Location >> <https://www.google.com/maps/place/TNO+-+Locatie+Delft+-+Stieltjesweg/@52.000788,4.3745183,17z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0x47c5b58c52869997:0x56681566be3b8c88!8m2!3d52.000788!4d4.376707> >> >> >> <image001.gif> <http://www.tno.nl/> >> This message may contain information that is not intended for you. If you >> are not the addressee or if this message was sent to you by mistake, you are >> requested to inform the sender and delete the message. TNO accepts no >> liability for the content of this e-mail, for the manner in which you use it >> and for damage of any kind resulting from the risks inherent to the >> electronic transmission of messages. >> >> >> >> >> From: [email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]> >> [mailto:[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>] On Behalf Of Richard Cyganiak >> Sent: donderdag 26 oktober 2017 12:51 >> To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: [topbraid-users] shacl rule inference >> >> Your example says: >> >> <http://example.org/ruletry <http://example.org/ruletry>> rdf:type >> owl:Ontology ; >> >> To import that ontology into another, one would have to say: >> >> <…> owl:imports <http://example.org/ruletry >> <http://example.org/ruletry>>. >> >> The SHACL document says: >> >> <http://www.w3.org/ns/shacl# <http://www.w3.org/ns/shacl>> rdf:type >> owl:Ontology ; >> >> To import the SHACL ontology, one thus has to say: >> >> <…> owl:imports <http://www.w3.org/ns/shacl# >> <http://www.w3.org/ns/shacl>>. >> >> If I wanted to import both, I might have: >> >> @prefix sh: <http://www.w3.org/ns/shacl# <http://www.w3.org/ns/shacl>>. >> @prefix ruletry: <http://example.org/ruletry# >> <http://example.org/ruletry>>. >> >> <…> >> owl:imports <http://example.org/ruletry >> <http://example.org/ruletry>>. >> owl:imports <http://www.w3.org/ns/shacl# >> <http://www.w3.org/ns/shacl>>. >> >> As you can easily see, one of those imports can be abbreviated, the other >> one can’t. >> >> Richard >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On 26 Oct 2017, at 11:37, Bohms, H.M. (Michel) <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> Well that was exactly the reason why I triggered…. >> >> In: >> >> # baseURI: http://example.org/ruletry <http://example.org/ruletry> >> # imports: http://www.w3.org/ns/shacl# <http://www.w3.org/ns/shacl> >> # prefix: ruletry >> >> @prefix owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl# >> <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl>> . >> @prefix rdf: <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns# >> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns>> . >> @prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema# >> <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema>> . >> @prefix ruletry: <http://example.org/ruletry# <http://example.org/ruletry>> . >> @prefix sh: <http://www.w3.org/ns/shacl# <http://www.w3.org/ns/shacl>> . >> @prefix xsd: <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema# >> <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema>> . >> >> <http://example.org/ruletry <http://example.org/ruletry>> >> rdf:type owl:Ontology ; >> owl:imports sh: ; >> owl:versionInfo "Created with TopBraid Composer" ; >> . >> >> You know see that the import is actually having the # because of the prefix >> method. >> Where it usually does not have this # normally….. >> >> >> So…? Why then is it ok in this case? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Dr. ir. H.M. (Michel) Böhms >> Senior Data Scientist >> >> >> >> >> T +31888663107 >> M +31630381220 >> E [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> Location >> <https://www.google.com/maps/place/TNO+-+Locatie+Delft+-+Stieltjesweg/@52.000788,4.3745183,17z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0x47c5b58c52869997:0x56681566be3b8c88!8m2!3d52.000788!4d4.376707> >> >> >> <image001.gif> <http://www.tno.nl/> >> This message may contain information that is not intended for you. If you >> are not the addressee or if this message was sent to you by mistake, you are >> requested to inform the sender and delete the message. TNO accepts no >> liability for the content of this e-mail, for the manner in which you use it >> and for damage of any kind resulting from the risks inherent to the >> electronic transmission of messages. >> >> >> >> >> From: [email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]> >> [mailto:[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>] On Behalf Of Richard Cyganiak >> Sent: donderdag 26 oktober 2017 12:30 >> To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: [topbraid-users] shacl rule inference >> >> >> On 26 Oct 2017, at 10:23, Bohms, H.M. (Michel) <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> And as a kind of consistency-freak I then ask immediately: why one time >> prefix only and in same list full uri for others …… >> >> That’s usually because the namespace URI defined in @prefix has an extra >> trailing character (hash or slash) that the imported URI doesn’t have. So >> the imported URI cannot be abbreviated with that prefix. For example: >> >> @prefix ex: <http://example.org/ <http://example.org/>o >> <http://example.org/o>ntology1# <http://example.org/>>. >> <> owl:imports <http://example.org/o <http://example.org/o>ntology1>. >> >> Richard >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "TopBraid Suite Users" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout >> <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>. >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "TopBraid Suite Users" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout >> <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>. >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "TopBraid Suite Users" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout >> <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>. >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "TopBraid Suite Users" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout >> <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>. >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "TopBraid Suite Users" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout >> <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>. >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "TopBraid Suite Users" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout >> <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>. >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "TopBraid Suite Users" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout >> <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>. >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "TopBraid Suite Users" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout >> <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>. > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "TopBraid Suite Users" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout > <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TopBraid Suite Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
