W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-sws-ig@w3.org > July 2006

Re: mapping complex type to OWL concept

From: dhavalkumar thakker <dhavalkumar@xsmail.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2006 13:31:06 +0100
Message-Id: <1153312266.780.266381086@webmail.messagingengine.com>
To: "Bijan Parsia" <bparsia@isr.umd.edu>
Cc: public-sws-ig@w3.org


Thanks for the suggestion. 
I am sorry if I misunderstood you, but are you saying that if I will
have my complexType such as :

<complexType name="ArrayOf_xsd_string">
  <restriction base="soapenc:Array">      
       <attribute ref="soapenc:arrayType"

then I will always have trouble in successfully executing the OWL-S
because I am still not clear whether this  possible and if yes

currently I am just specifying as a string(which doesnot make sesnse,
however doesnt give any exception while executing which is improvement)

      <process:Output rdf:ID="fetchDataReturn">

and the service executes successfully, but returns nothing(
theoratically looks correct as the mapping is not proper)...

Thanks for your help.


On Sun, 16 Jul 2006 18:47:23 +0100, "Bijan Parsia" <bparsia@isr.umd.edu>
> You have considerable freedom (arbitrary freedom, in some sense) in  
> the mapping. If you think these arrays model a particular sort of  
> entity, then you should have some idea about how the elements of the  
> array map to features of the entity. If, on the other hand, the array  
> really *is* just an array, i.e., a container for values, you are  
> better off maintaining it as such. Which, if this were a simple type,  
> would be simple as you could use that type on a datatype property.  
> Unfortunately, I'm pretty sure that complextypes only can be sensibly  
> mapped to XMLLiterals, which rather sucks.
> You'd have trouble anyway as there is no canonical mapping from user  
> defined types to URIs which is required for using datatypes in OWL  
> and RDF.
> Cheers,
> Bijan.
Dhavalkumar Thakker
Phd candidate,
Intelligent Simulation and Modelling Group,
Nottingham Trent University, England

http://www.fastmail.fm - Same, same, but different…
Received on Wednesday, 19 July 2006 12:31:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:54:17 UTC