W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > October 2000

Re: validating RDF syntax with XML Schema

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 13:22:39 -0500
Message-ID: <39F481EF.146F4FD8@w3.org>
To: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
CC: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
Dan Brickley wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 20 Oct 2000, Dan Connolly wrote:
[...]
> > RDF Syntax: An XML Schema Approach
> >     in progress Aug 2000
> > http://www.w3.org/2000/07/DAML-0-5-syntax
[...]
> Can we mechanically fabricate the XML Schema for each RDF
> namespace? ie. given a list of properties, classes (and other
> resources) described by the RDF, can you auto-generate the XML Schema?

Almost... the trick is deciding which syntactic
variant of propertyElt you're using... for
example, these are both RDF properties, but
I've declared one to be propertyEltRef
(i.e. <first resource="..."/>) and
the other valueObj (i.e. <rest><rdf:Description>...</></rest>).

| <element name="first" type="rdf:propertyEltRef"
|	 equivClass="rdf:propertyElt" />
|
| <element name="rest" type="rdf:valueObj"
|	 equivClass="rdf:propertyElt" />

	-- http://www.w3.org/2000/07/hs78/kif.xsd
	v 1.3 2000/08/13 19:19:20

You can use xsi:parseType in the instance to
say otherwise for a particular propertyElt.

My intution says that rdf:parseType and
xsi:type should evolve to be the same thing.

> If not, are there at least some high level similarities amongst these
> schemas that could make the task simpler?
> 
> Dan

-- 
bind default <http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/kb>
<mailto:connolly@w3.org> is mailbox of 
  [a Person; called "Dan Connolly";
  affiliation [ a Consortium; called "W3C";
	     homePage <http://www.w3.org> ];
  homePage <http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/>;
 ]
Received on Monday, 23 October 2000 14:22:47 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:44 GMT