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

RE: ACTION 2001-11-02#02: Datatyping use-cases from CC/PP

From: <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2001 21:08:29 +0200
Message-ID: <2BF0AD29BC31FE46B7887732114404316217AC@trebe003.NOE.Nokia.com>
To: Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com
Cc: danbri@w3.org, phayes@ai.uwf.edu, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org

Thanks. That does clarify things for me.

Patrick


> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext Graham Klyne [mailto:Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com]
> Sent: 14 November, 2001 19:34
> To: Stickler Patrick (NRC/Tampere)
> Cc: danbri@w3.org; phayes@ai.uwf.edu; w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
> Subject: RE: ACTION 2001-11-02#02: Datatyping use-cases from CC/PP
> 
> 
> At 03:29 PM 11/14/01 +0200, Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com wrote:
> >No. But I'd hope that we *are* the right WG to define RDF Schema to
> >say things like 'an instance of the person class must have two
> >and only two values for the property x:parent and the values of
> >those properties may not be identitical (share the same URI).
> 
> Not, as far as I am aware:  the DAML+OIL and Web ontology groups are 
> building those structures on top of RDF.
> 
> >Right? Otherwise, we are left with *no* means whatsoever to
> >define constraints about manditory knowledge for specific
> >applications. XML Schema cannot define constraints for knowledge
> >bases build from the syndication of multiple instances, so
> >the constraint functionality offered by RDFS is critical.
> 
> Yes: no such means within core RDF(S).
> 
> >Am I really understanding you correctly as saying that RDFS
> >no longer defines any constraints whatsoever?
> 
> That's my understanding.
> 
> >Where then does the responsibility get shifted to? DAML+OIL?
> >The WebOnt WG deliverables?
> 
> That's my expectation.
> 
> ..
> 
> You (and others) might argue that this means RDF(S) is only "half a 
> solution".  For some purposes, that may be true, but I 
> strongly believe 
> that for many other applications it is enough.  The availability of a 
> simple, consistent language for applications to express 
> ground facts is a 
> very powerful tool.  Its's simplicity (from a developer 
> perspective) will 
> be, in my view, a key factor in getting lots of raw metadata 
> out there on 
> the web for more advanced reasoning engines to chew upon and 
> generally work 
> their magic.  The logical consistency of this simple language 
> is crucial to 
> ensuring that more powerful generic layers (DAML_OIL, WebOnt 
> and more) can 
> be built on this foundation.
> 
> Here are some notes I used to present RDF to our development team:
> http://public.research.mimesweeper.com/RDF/RDFMetadataForEndTo
EndContent.html

#g


------------------------------------------------------------
Graham Klyne                    MIMEsweeper Group
Strategic Research              <http://www.mimesweeper.com>
<Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
       __
      /\ \
     /  \ \
    / /\ \ \
   / / /\ \ \
  / / /__\_\ \
/ / /________\
\/___________/
Received on Wednesday, 14 November 2001 14:08:25 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:42:40 EDT