Re: XML syntax for SWRL

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider (
Date: 06/28/04

  • Next message: Mike Dean: "RE: corrections and an issue for SWRL spec esp. in abstract syntax"
    From: Sandro Hawke <>
    Subject: Re: XML syntax for SWRL 
    Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2004 00:32:07 -0400
    > > >This might be a good reason in some cases, but I don't see how it helps at
    > > >all for names of variables.
    > > 
    > > I don't think variable names is one of the places where it's most crucial 
    > > to be extensible.
    > > I was addressing the general point.  That said...
    > > Wrt names, more generally (e.g., predicate names), suppose one decided 
    > > later to have multiple parts/aspects to the name,
    > > e.g., an additional prefix name cf. namespaces or Prolog modules, or local 
    > > name and global name, etc.
    > > It's easy to make a name an element (instead of an attribute) in the 
    > > design, so why not;
    > > to do so preserves flexibility at little or no cost.
    > ...
    > > As go names in general, why not be uniform in the design and treat variable 
    > > names in a similar fashion.
    > Another reason I've heard is to allow language markup, eg to support
    > screen readers.  The variable name "channel" would be pronounced by
    > text-to-speech software quite differently if language-tagged "fr" vs
    > "en".
    > It seems far-fetched to me to imagine this mattering very much for
    > SWRL [wouldn't you want the names pronouned in your language anyway,
    > or something?], but it is a non-dart reason I've heard.
    >       -- sandro
    This seems to me to be so far-fetched as to be negative.
    A variable name is just like an RDF ID, so why then are RDF IDs attributes?

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 06/28/04 EST