2007/6/8, Evgeny Egorochkin <<a href="mailto:phreedom.stdin@gmail.com">phreedom.stdin@gmail.com</a>>:<div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> On Friday 08 June 2007 17:53:22 Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen wrote: > Another point: many ontologies can co-exist with the aid of namespacing. > You > > > can lump together results from queries to any number of indexers, and > > it'll > > work just fine. > > Yeah, I know. Putting the ontos in different dirs was not meant as a way to > do pseudo namespacing. We should use real namesping for this. Having the > ontos in different dirs was just to make it easier for apps needing to > parse the different ontos. You can expect ontologies to reference each other so the separation is not at all useful for parsing. </blockquote><div> A separation is essential for having a consistent install procedure or else apps might overwrite each other's ontologies. Another approach is to have conventions for the file names that 3rd party ontos use. If it is guaranteed that third party ontos only have one file, we can pile everything in the same directory, if not we basically have to create a dir per onto. Cheers, Mikkel </div> </div>