W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-wg@w3.org > November 2007

Re: unnamed datatypes in RDF/XML

From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2007 09:19:46 +0000
Message-Id: <F51FB90F-FE64-41B2-9BEF-3D5D822490BD@cs.man.ac.uk>
To: public-owl-wg Group WG <public-owl-wg@w3.org>

On Nov 20, 2007, at 5:51 AM, Alan Ruttenberg wrote:

> Doesn't this just mean we have to be a little more careful where we  
> put the namespace?
>
>  <owl:Class ID="ActionTime"
>     xmlns:xs="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"
>     <owl:equivalentClass>
>        <owl:Restriction>
>          <owl:onProperty rdf:resource="#hasTime"/>
>          <owl:someValuesFrom rdf:parseType="Literal">
>            <xs:simpleType xmlns:my="http://example.org/myDatatypes"  
> >      <--- the namespace is here now
[snip]
Doesn't help because Exclusive canonicalization (unlike  
canonicalization) doesn't "see" prefix use inside attribute content,  
thus treats this decl as "unused, so must be removed".

> BTW, Bijan, why would you create a different data type for each  
> time interval you annotate, rather than defining a single  
> "interval" datatype and then using a bunch of values from it?

Because I want to say

	event1: occursAt some (=>2 and <=5).
	event2: occursAt some (=>4 and <=6).
	event3: occursAt some (=>7 and <=10).
...

(Assume occursAt is functional.)

I.e., I know events occur within certain intervals, i.e., I know the  
boundaries of the intervals. There is no single datatype I can  
instantiate. Even if I had lists, I wouldn't have the right semantics.

Btw, I can infer that there must be at least two distinct events from  
the above. I can do this even if I change the third line to:
	
	event3: occursAt some (=>6 and <=10).

(Since event2 can be = event 1 *or* event3, but not both.)

(If you have different sensors and some event detector, you might  
have them reporting the "same" events with somewhat different  
intervals.)

Cheers,
Bijan.
Received on Tuesday, 20 November 2007 09:19:57 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:13:27 GMT