W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-comments@w3.org > January to March 2002

Re: p3p rdf schema

From: <tarod@softhome.net>
Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2002 17:29:24 GMT
Message-ID: <20020205172924.8294.qmail@softhome.net>
To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Cc: www-rdf-comments@w3.org

Brian McBride writes:

> Hi Marc,
> 
> At 15:58 05/02/2002 +0000, tarod@softhome.net wrote:
> 
> >   Here you mix rdfschema and rdf, so I guess the first part is rdf and the
> >second one is rdfs (am I right?) if so, you should also have a rdf:Class
> >description to define &bwm;Gotcha, don't you?
> 
> No more than you did in your schema fragment :)
> 
> >and you also need a instance
> >of Gotcha called Gotcha, then you have something correct, but I don't
> >understand what you want to represent with that...
> 
> 
> I think the reason we may be misunderstanding each other may be due to 
> different assumptions about processsing models.  My model works like this:
> 
> 
> Your schema fragment was:
> 
> <rdf:Property rdf:about="&p3p;disputeResolution">
>    <rdfs:label xml:lang="en">dispute resolution</rdfs:label>
>    <rdfs:comment xml:lang="en">
>      A collection of dispute resolution procedures that may be
>      followed for disputes about a service&apos;s privacy practices.
>    </rdfs:comment>
>    <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="&p3p;Policy"/>
>    <rdfs:range
>      rdf:resource="&p3p;DisputeResolution-independent-organization"/>
>    <rdfs:range  rdf:resource="&p3p;DisputeResolution-court"/>
>    <rdfs:range  rdf:resource="&p3p;DisputeResolution-applicable-law"/>
>    <rdfs:range  rdf:resource="&p3p;DisputeResolution-customer-service"/>
> </rdf:Property>
> 
> merge it with the data I provide:
> 
>    <p3p:Policy>
>      <p3p:disputeResolution rdf:resource="&bwm;Gotcha"/>
>    </p2p:Policy>
> 
>    <rdf:Property rdf:about="&p3p;disputeResolution">
>      <rdfs:range rdf:resource="&bwm;Gotcha"/>
>    </rdf:Property>
> 
> which gives:
> 
> <rdf:Property rdf:about="&p3p;disputeResolution">
>    <rdfs:label xml:lang="en">dispute resolution</rdfs:label>
>    <rdfs:comment xml:lang="en">
>      A collection of dispute resolution procedures that may be
>      followed for disputes about a service&apos;s privacy practices.
>    </rdfs:comment>
>    <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="&p3p;Policy"/>
>    <rdfs:range
>      rdf:resource="&p3p;DisputeResolution-independent-organization"/>
>    <rdfs:range  rdf:resource="&p3p;DisputeResolution-court"/>
>    <rdfs:range  rdf:resource="&p3p;DisputeResolution-applicable-law"/>
>    <rdfs:range  rdf:resource="&p3p;DisputeResolution-customer-service"/>
>    <rdfs:range  rdf:resource="&bwm:Gotcha"/>
> </rdf:Property>
> 
>    <p3p:Policy>
>      <p3p:disputeResolution rdf:resource="&bwm;Gotcha"/>
>    </p2p:Policy>
> 
> Now I have effectively added Gotcha to the list allowable values.  I 
> suspect you'll tell me I'm not allowed to merge my data with the schema.
> 
> Brian
> 

  Jejejeje, ok, I understand you now :)

  But here you are modifying your schema from an instance (I don't know if
it's valid or not, but as far as I know is posible, your rdf is correct)
But then you are introducing errors to the schema, I can add as much errors
as I wish and my model will be a valid rdf but not a valid p3p model, am I
right? But I was not talking about that, I was talking about the model that
w3c proposed in order to represent p3p, it has some 'errors' (some of them
intrinsec to the model, I mean, they cann't be corrected) but some of them
can be corrected if we use the 'in my opinion' right interpretation of
range/domain constraints, the original one.
    
  Thanks,
        Marc
Received on Tuesday, 5 February 2002 12:27:19 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 21 September 2012 14:16:30 GMT