W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-comments@w3.org > December 2009

OWL XML Literal constraining facets

From: pmurray <pmurray@bigpond.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2009 14:13:55 +1100
Message-ID: <26269759.1261970035427.JavaMail.root@nskntwebs05p>
To: public-owl-comments@w3.org
I'm surprised that XML literals have no normative constraining facets. (Structural Specification and Functional-Style Syntax, 4.8).

I would have thought that document element namespace and tag name would have been very obvious picks. XSD schema namespace and schema location also. Perhaps also DTD "public" and "system" values might be useful normative constraining facets.

It would be nice if W3C had some standard OWL datatypes for the various w3c OWL XML applications - most especially a dataype for the XHTML namespace, and more specific datatypes for the varios elements - partucularly "html", "div" and "span" elements.

I could then state that a property has range "owl:xhtml-html", and use a linked-data 303 redirect to connect the IRI through to the webpage in question. Or I could use a triple store to hold XHTML div blocks, and allow a user to edit them with any one of several javascript editors.

We could also create constraining facets for XML attrribute values (the facted value would have to specify attribute namespace, name, and value), especially for xml:lang ... but thats heading in the direction of creating a full xml schema definition language in OWL. XSD does a better job of that.

 ______________
"In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. But in practise, there often is."

Paul Murray
pmurray@anbg.gov.au; Paul.Murray@environment.gov.au; pmurray@bigpond.com; paulmurray@users.sourceforge.net
http://twitter.com/PaulMurrayCbr
http://paulmurray.users.sourceforge.net/
http://paulmurray.id.au
[61] 0404164112
Received on Wednesday, 30 December 2009 12:53:57 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 30 December 2009 12:53:57 GMT