• To: Miles Sabin <miles@m...>, paul@p..., nogievet@c..., xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: equivalentTo vs. XSLT
• From: "m batsis" <mbatsis@n...>
• Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 17:18:59 +0200
• Organization: Netsmart S.A., Greece
• References: <BD2DBD26EE0BAA48B1A425C7BE7923002CFF9F@c...> <200211111241.54826.miles@m...> <012f01c2898f$3249ef30$1101a8c0@VAIOCOGI> <200211111440.54331.miles@m...>
• Reply-to: mbatsis@n...
• User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.1) Gecko/20020826

Miles Sabin wrote:

>Nikita Ogievetsky wrote,
>
>>engine can be implemented in any language.
>>As I understand it correctly, all you are saying is that OWL can at
>>least partially be implemented in XSL
>>
>
>Not quite. I'm saying that vocabulary to vocabulary mappings can be 
>expressed in XSLT as well as in OWL, and I'm suggesting that for many 
>practical purposes XSLT is likely to be a better bet.
>

Sorry, I have to dissagree. I cannot imagine even a single case where 
that is true. A transformation can only be applied to a "screenshot" of 
the source data. Also, such an attempt may result in loss of semantic 
info. A transformation may result in a correct mapping between 
ontologies, but will fail in producing implicit statements that would 
result from those mappings after applied with equivalentTo.

Cheers,

Manos

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: equivalentTo vs. XSLT
    • From: Miles Sabin <miles@m...>

• References:
  • RE: XML/RDF
    • From: Micah Dubinko <MDubinko@c...>
  • Re: equivalentTo vs. XSLT
    • From: Miles Sabin <miles@m...>
  • Re: equivalentTo vs. XSLT
    • From: "Nikita Ogievetsky" <nogievet@c...>
  • Re: equivalentTo vs. XSLT
    • From: Miles Sabin <miles@m...>

• Prev by Date: ANN: Character dump utility for XSL-FO (XML-Dev)
• Next by Date: Re: equivalentTo vs. XSLT
• Previous by thread: Re: equivalentTo vs. XSLT
• Next by thread: Re: equivalentTo vs. XSLT
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread