W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-comments@w3.org > January to March 2003

Re: status of rdf, rdfs, and owl ``namespace files''

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 07:25:29 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <20030320.072529.98317044.pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
To: dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk
Cc: Nick.Efthymiou@schwab.com, www-rdf-comments@w3.org

From: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: status of rdf, rdfs, and owl ``namespace files'' 
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 11:52:20 +0000

> >>>"Peter F. Patel-Schneider" said:

[...]

> > There is invalid information in these documents related to rdfs:comment,
> > rdfs:label, rdfs:isDefinedBy, and rdfs:seeAlso.  The RDF file also contains
> > rdfs:domain and rdfs:range information that is not valid in RDF.
> > (It is valid in RDFS, but not in RDF.)
> 
> I'm still unconvinced by this claim, 

Huh?  You believe that the rdfs:domain information in the RDF file is 
RDF-entailed by the empty RDF graph?  I suggest that you talk to Pat about
this.

> but I've now got a list of the
> terms you have problems with - thanks.

> > ...
> > > If you trying to say that the triples do not describe the newer
> > > vocabulary terms that the RDF Core WG added for Collections (List,
> > > first, rest, nil) and datatypes (XMLLiteral) and are asking for this
> > > to be corrected, this could be part of the action for the same issue above.
> > 
> > Nope, this is not the only lack here.
> > 
> > This file does not include any of the container membership properties, for
> > example.
> 
> i.e the properties named rdf:_<n> where n is a decimal integer greater than 0.
> 
> You seriously want us to produce a graph describing an infinite
> number of rdf properties?   This must be some kind of subtle joke :)

No joke.  I'm just pointing out (somewhat indirectly) that one of the
things that one might like to do with these documents is not possible.
> 
> > [my long reply elided]
> >
> > This would be one way to proceed.
> 
> Given this is neither a yes or no and getting no resolution of your
> problems you think you have.  Maybe rather than me trying to guess
> solution you want, it would be easier if you just stated what changes
> to specific sections of RDF Core working drafts that would resolve
> this thread for you.  Changes to other documents are less likely to
> be possible.
> 
> Dave

Well then, how about 


Appendix A: Partial Description of RDF Schema Vocabulary in RDF/XML

A partial RDF description of some of the RDF Core vocabulary is given here
in RDF/XML serialization syntax.  This RDF schema includes statements about
RDF resources originally introduced by the 1999 RDF Model and Syntax
specification, as well as statements about resources introduced in the RDF
Core Schema vocabulary.  

The information given here neither complete nor valid.  For example, there
is no information about the RDF container membership properties or about
RDF datatyping.  Further, the information concerning rdfs:comment,
rdfs:label, rdfs:isDefinedBy, and rdfs:seeAlso relationships is not
entailed by an empty RDF graph.  Nonetheless the information could be used
by tools as a source of some information about some vocabulary elements.

Please note that the namespace URI for the RDF Schema vocabulary could
change in future versions of this specification.  This RDF/XML is also
available as a separate RDF/XML document (rdfs-namespace.xml). It is not
currently published at the W3C RDF Schema namespace URI.

-----------------------------------------------------

<!--

A partial RDF description of some of the RDF Core vocabulary is given here
in RDF/XML serialization syntax.  This RDF schema includes statements about
RDF resources originally introduced by the 1999 RDF Model and Syntax
specification, as well as statements about resources introduced in the RDF
Core Schema vocabulary.  

The information given here neither complete nor valid.  For example, there
is no information about the RDF container membership properties or about
RDF datatyping.  Further, the information concerning rdfs:comment,
rdfs:label, rdfs:isDefinedBy, and rdfs:seeAlso relationships is not
entailed by an empty RDF graph.  Nonetheless the information could be used
by tools as a source of some information about some vocabulary elements.

-->
Received on Thursday, 20 March 2003 07:25:46 GMT

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