W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > June 2001

RE: Description Syntax question.

From: Ron Daniel <rdaniel@interwoven.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2001 16:30:58 -0700
To: "Bradley Marshall" <bradmars@yahoo.com>, <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Message-ID: <EMEKICCGFEKJFGKMFLEPCEELCLAA.rdaniel@interwoven.com>
You are making use of an allowed abbreviation. (See the
third abbreviation defined in section 2.2.2 of the
RDF M&S spec.)

If it works better for you, keep doing it. I know
I use it on occasion.

Ron Daniel Jr.
Standards Architect
Tel: +1 415 778 3113
Fax: +1 415 778 3131
Email: rdaniel@interwoven.com 

Visit www.interwoven.com
Moving Business to the Web

 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org
> [mailto:www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Bradley Marshall
> Sent: Friday, June 01, 2001 3:54 PM
> To: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
> Subject: rdf:Description Syntax question.
> 
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> I had found somewhere, now I'm not sure where, that it
> was OK to replace rdf:Description with a tag in my own
> namespace, ie:
> 
> <rdf:RDF
> xmlns:go="http://www.geneontology.org/dtds/go.dtd#"
> xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
> >
>     <go:term
> rdf:about="http://www.geneontology.org/go#GO:0016787"/>
> </rdf:RDF>
> 
> I thought this made the meaning clearer.  My RDF tool
> of choice is 4suite's 4rdf.  When I parse such a
> document with 4rdf I get the resulting triple:
> 
> [Subject: http://www.geneontology.org/go#GO:0016787,
> Predicate:
> http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type,
> Object:
> "http://www.geneontology.org/dtds/go.dtd#term"]
> 
> This seems like an acceptable result to me.  However,
> it was recently pointed out to me that I should
> explicitly use the rdf:Description tag, ie:
> 
> <rdf:RDF
> xmlns:go="http://www.geneontology.org/dtds/go.dtd#"
> xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
> >
>   <rdf:Description
> rdf:about="http://www.geneontology.org/go#GO:0016787">
>     <go:type>term</go:type>
>   </rdf:Description>
> </rdf:RDF>
> 
> Is my first approach illegal, bad form or otherwise
> wrong?  I find it to be a useful construct.  Am I
> abusing rdf:type?
> 
> Thank You
> Brad Marshall 
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 
> a year!  http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
Received on Friday, 1 June 2001 19:32:42 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:49 GMT