On 12/21/2013 20:45, Simon Cox wrote:
Thanks a lot Irene. That clarifies things for me. I'll re-state it in
my words to check I've got it right:
1. the set of graphs in the workspace is determined by the <import>
statements in the ontologies
2. the baseURI is used as the graph name for each import.
AFAICT the issue that I raised comes about because
owl:import rdfs:range owl:Ontology .
rather than _graph_ . So even though the specs do not require any
specific correspondence between ontology name and baseURI, because it
makes sense to interpret an import as operating on a _graph_ we end up
in the situation that works best if the ontology name is a graph name,
which is easiest if it is the context or baseURI.
The issue is really that range of owl:import is not really right.
The range of owl:import can be owl:Ontology, and OWL reasoners can then
infer that the graph must be an owl:Ontology even if it is not
explicitly declared as such.
Holger
--
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Group "TopBraid Suite Users", the topics of which include Enterprise Vocabulary
Network (EVN), TopBraid Composer, TopBraid Live, TopBraid Insight, SPARQLMotion, SPARQL
Web Pages and SPIN.
To post to this group, send email to
[email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/topbraid-users?hl=en
---
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/groups/opt_out.
