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

Comment on RDF Schema 1.0 dated 12 Nov. 2002

From: <MDaconta@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2002 18:16:57 EST
Message-ID: <fe.20b6d3be.2b097d69@aol.com>
To: www-rdf-comments@w3.org
Hi RDF WG,

In reviewing the RDF Schema specification I believe the 
property rdfs:isDefinedBy is ambiguous as currently specified.  
The document presents four facts about the property:

1. it is a resource that defines the subject.  However, how it defines
the subject is never specified.  Additionally, the domain and range
are both rdfs:Resource which offers no indication of how this defines
the resource.

2. the document overview describes it as the namespace of the resource.
Which is something that would presumably be handled by the namespace
prefix and namespace declaration - therefore possibly making this
property redundant.

3. In appendix B, the property is used and the value is the namespace; 
however, the URI retrieves the RDF Schema with the definitions.  It would
be useful if this practice was documented and specified by the rdfs:Range
of this property.

4. the property is stated to be a subPropertyOf rdfs:seeAlso. To me, this
is the most confusing aspect as the common use of seeAlso is optional; 
whereas, identifying a defining resource is usually mandatory (as in 
the definition of a "valid" XML document).

It would be beneficial for this property to be more concretely defined as
well as addressed in the Primer.

Best wishes,

- Mike
----------------------------------------------------
Michael C. Daconta
Director, Web & Technology Services
www.mcbrad.com
Received on Sunday, 17 November 2002 18:17:09 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 21 September 2012 14:16:31 GMT