W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > September 2003

Re: Correct Owl representation

From: Benjamin Nowack <office@e-senses.de>
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 00:30:49 +0200
To: Monika Solanki <monika@dmu.ac.uk>
Cc: "www-rdf-interest" <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Message-ID: <PM-EH.20030927003049.86532.1.1D@192.168.27.2>

Monika Solanki (monika@dmu.ac.uk) schrieb am 26.09.2003:
>(...)
><Lens>
>    <focal-length>75-300mm zoom</focal-length>
>   <f-stop>4.5-5.6</f-stop>
></Lens>
>
>Would the above be incorrect representation in OWL ?
>
>Would it be correct to do it like this  
>
><Lens>
>    <focal-length rdf:datatype="&xsd;string">75-300mm zoom</focal-length>
>   <f-stop rdf:datatype="&xsd;string">4.5-5.6</f-stop>
></Lens>
>
>If this is correct, then what is the rationale behind specifying range 
>as "String" in defining the property ?

you are right. properties of individuals always need the additional
datatype when serialized as RDF/XML (section 6.1 of [1]). I think the 
reason is the "RDF/XML" format. You can define the range at the ontology 
level, but this is separate from the instance level as the rdf:datatype
attribute seems to be required if you want to write _typed_ literals
(section 2.9 of [2]). I'm not sure but this could be the reason for the
redundancy, just to make sure that rdf parsers don't handle the property
values as plain literals.

hope that helps..

regards,
benjamin

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/
[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-syntax-grammar/

___________________________
benjamin nowack

am exerzierplatz 1
de-97072 wuerzburg
Received on Friday, 26 September 2003 18:31:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:52:02 GMT