W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-calendar@w3.org > February 2004

deriving the schema from the iCalendar RFC [was: XHTML version of RFC 2445]

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 12:31:26 -0600
To: www-rdf-calendar@w3.org
Message-Id: <1076524286.29429.28.camel@dirk>

OK, so I now have a schema that's starting to be pretty useful...


It has pretty good domain/range info on all icalendar
properties. I've checked the properties that occur in
the first few test data files pretty thoroughly, and I'm
convinced the rest are right.

I'd like somebody to review and confirm.

I'm leaning toward replacing
with that content, once I get a couple things done:

  -- base URI issues
  -- connecting it to the test data somehow

I'm thinking about using
to connect the data to the schema... or an OWL
DL checker like pellet... or something...
I'll let you know when I've got it working.

Meanwhile... who agrees that this schema is better?

On Wed, 2004-01-28 at 03:02, Dan Connolly wrote:
> I produced an XHTML-happy version of the iCalendar RFC:
>   http://www.w3.org/2002/12/cal/rfc2445
>   http://www.w3.org/2002/12/cal/rfc2445.html
> It has TOC navigation, so you can cite section 4.4 directly:
>   http://www.w3.org/2002/12/cal/rfc2445#sec4.4
> I'm sure this has been done before, but my motivation
> is to extract schema information out of the RFC, and
> XHTML sorta came out as a debugging byproduct as
> my code was digesting the spec...
>   http://www.w3.org/2002/12/cal/slurpIcalSpec.py
>   v 1.1 2004/01/28 08:54:24
> Share and Enjoy.
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
see you at the W3C Tech Plenary in Cannes 1-5 Mar 2003?
Received on Wednesday, 11 February 2004 13:31:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:14:12 UTC