W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > April 2001

Re: RDF changes

From: <jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 12:02:35 +0100
To: jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com
Cc: fmanola@mitre.org, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <OF998B60A1.4486907C-ON41256A39.003B6A12@bayer-ag.com>

Jena and SiRPAC seem to be glad with

<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
         xmlns:rdfc="http://www.w3.org/2001/rdf-core#"
         xmlns="file:/daml/reification/n3.n3#">

    <rdf:Description>
        <rdfc:is rdf:parseType="Quote">
            <rdf:Description rdf:about="#subject">
                <predicate1 rdf:resource="#object1"/>
            </rdf:Description>
        </rdfc:is>
        <predicate2 rdf:resource="#object2"/>
    </rdf:Description>
    <rdf:Description>
        <rdfc:is rdf:parseType="Quote">
            <rdf:Description rdf:about="#subject">
                <predicate3 rdf:resource="#object3"/>
            </rdf:Description>
        </rdfc:is>
        <predicate2 rdf:resource="#object2"/>
    </rdf:Description>
    <rdf:Description rdf:about="#subject">
        <predicate1 rdf:resource="#object1"/>
    </rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>

and an rdf:parseType="Quote" aware processor could build
the appropriate contexts. Isn't that nice?

--
Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/

ps I'm really sorry to miss the first teleconference, but I
   have a very unpleasant (but urgent) meeting with my dentist



 -----------------+-----------------------------------------+------------------ 
 (Embedded image   Jos De_Roo - 00 32 3 444 6256               04/21/2001 03:21 
 moved to file:    Agfa-Gevaert N.V. - Mortsel - Belgium      PM                
 pic00491.pcx)     Corporate Research Centre on Electronic                      
                   Imaging Systems                                              
                                                                                




To:   fmanola@mitre.org@INTERNET
cc:   w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org@INTERNET@BAYERNOTES
Subject:  Re: RDF changes  (Document link: Jos De_Roo)


Mike Dean has made a nice test case for reification at
http://www.daml.org/2001/04/reification/

[although I think that the n3.rdf should look more like

<!-- Processed by Id: cwm.py,v 1.29 2001/02/28 20:45:26 timbl Exp -->
<!--     using base file:/daml/reification/n3.n3-->


<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
    xmlns="file:/daml/reification/n3.n3#">

    <rdf:Description>
        <rdf:is parseType="Quote">
            <rdf:Description about="#subject">
                <predicate1 resource="#object1"/>
            </rdf:Description>
        </rdf:is>
        <predicate2 resource="#object2"/>
    </rdf:Description>
    <rdf:Description>
        <rdf:is parseType="Quote">
            <rdf:Description about="#subject">
                <predicate3 resource="#object3"/>
            </rdf:Description>
        </rdf:is>
        <predicate2 resource="#object2"/>
    </rdf:Description>
    <rdf:Description about="#subject">
        <predicate1 resource="#object1"/>
    </rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>

isn't it?]

BTW I'm very much in favor of that kind of RDF
(in a new namespace)

--
Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/




fmanola@mitre.org@INTERNET@w3.org on 04/20/2001 11:33:51 PM

Please respond to fmanola@mitre.org@INTERNET

Sent by:  w3c-rdfcore-wg-request@w3.org


To:   w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org@INTERNET
cc:   w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org@INTERNET
Subject:  Re: RDF changes
This sounds like a sensible idea to me.  It would be a useful rough
classification of the issues, along the lines Brian suggested earlier.
For one thing, a formal semantics of just the triple model should be a
relatively straightforward exercise (e.g., using those developed for
DAML+OIL).  It would also be worthwhile to get a more detailed picture
of which existing uses of RDF would be disturbed by which changes.  For
example, how much do existing implementations use reification, and
exactly how do they use it?

--Frank

"R.V.Guha" wrote:
>
> In the spirit of considering changes to what exists, I'd like to propose
>
> that we  at least consider the following:
>
> RDF M&S puts too many things in one "layer". Maybe we should
> have a core which does nothing but define the triple model (and
> maybe a syntax). Then comes schema concepts like Class, domain
> etc. Then come layers for container, reification, etc.
>
> This will help us put RDF on a firmer logical basis, help explain it,
> help implementations, ...
>
> Maybe the new thing is not called RDF, but xRDF or something like
> that.
>
> guha
>

--
Frank Manola                   The MITRE Corporation
202 Burlington Road, MS A345   Bedford, MA 01730-1420
mailto:fmanola@mitre.org       voice: 781-271-8147   FAX: 781-271-8752







Received on Wednesday, 25 April 2001 06:02:50 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:35:04 EDT