I've been searching for a way to build ontologies that raise the least
possible uncertainties/questions with my users and keep stumbling over
what's probably a simple problem. Hope someone here can help:
Here's the pattern I use now.
<rdf:RDF
...
xmlns:core="
http://fed.gov/ontology/2009/07/core#"
xmlns:dod="
http://fed.gov/ontology/2009/07/dod#"
xmlns:pmbc="
http://fed.gov/ontology/2009/07/pmbc#"
xml:base="
http://fed.gov/ontology/2009/07/dod"
>
<owl:Ontology rdf:about="">
<rdfs:comment>A comment</rdfs:comment>
<rdfs:label>{$file}</rdfs:label>
<owl:imports rdf:resource="
http://fed.gov/ontology/2009/07/
core"/>
...
</owl:Ontology>
This works so long as the target of those owl:imports have no
extension. If I move "core" to "core.owl" (to stop tools like Protege
from refusing to even consider extension-less filenames), the only way
I can make things work is to rejigger the whole file
so that the namespace is core.owl too. There are about a half-dozen
such cases; core, pmbc, dod, etc.
I want the file/resource name to be pmbc.owl but the namespace to be
http://fed.gov/ontology/2009/07/pmbc#
.
xmlns:pmbc="
http://fed.gov/ontology/2009/07/pmbc#"
Is that possible?