W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-dev@w3.org > April to June 2007

Re: RDFS compatibility information in OWL-DL documents

From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2007 12:48:46 +0100
Message-Id: <56FCF2AD-3D76-4D44-9651-942EF233597C@cs.man.ac.uk>
Cc: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>, public-owl-dev@w3.org
To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>

On Apr 18, 2007, at 11:23 AM, Jeremy Carroll wrote:

> Bijan Parsia wrote:
>> I have a lonely preference for literals, but the toolkits have  
>> problems with them (and there are namespace issues I think you've  
>> mentioned...you could use an alternative syntax but then the  
>> toolkits just die faster :)).
> I think this might be the best approach.

Ooo, now *two* people like it!

Consensus...here we come! :)

(To be fair, I've usually advocated embedding RDF/XML since that  
would keep us "standards tied" all the way down, only one syntax,  
etc. and that seems to have problems. One could encode it as a string  
instead of as an xmlliteral which might work better.)


> _:a a owl11:Annotation .
> _:a owl11:annotating """
> # some turtle that gives the triples being annotated
> """ .
> _:a rdfs:comment """ .
> annotation
> """
> _a dc:creator "Another Annotation" .

You could also do:

_:a a owl11:Axiom;
      rdf:value """" the turtle or xml or whatever expessing the axiom"
_:a rdfs:comment """"whatever"
_:a dc:creator """bijan"""...

Received on Wednesday, 18 April 2007 11:49:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:58:15 UTC