Re: DAML question.

From: Mike Dean (
Date: 10/20/00

Good questions!

> 1) The third item listed under details seems to imply that both ontologies
> and separate annotation files will have the same ".daml" extension. Is this
> the case?

Currently, yes.

> Shouldn't there be a way of differentiating between files that
> contain annotation and files that contain ontologies,  or are DAML parsers
> going to be smart enough to know the difference based on file content?

The language currently allows you mix ontology Class and
Property declarations with instance definitions in a single
file.  This may or may not be a good thing.

I've adopted the convention of putting timestamps in the
file names for ontologies, e.g. actionitems-20000905.rdfs
(soon to be .daml).

I'm hoping some "DAML best practices" will emerge from the
homework assignment.

> 2) If we are using separate files to contain the annotation, Should we use
> the "Link" element to reference the annotation in our regular html files?

I think so.  Again, we're hoping best practices will emerge.
> 3) Somewhat related, Action Item 18 calls for the registration of a daml
> mime type (probably 'text/daml'). Should we setup this mime type on our web
> server while we're publishing our webpage?

For now we're using text/plain for .daml files.



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 04/03/02 EST