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@>

Monika Solanki (monika@dmu.ac.uk) schrieb am 26.09.2003:
>    <focal-length>75-300mm zoom</focal-length>
>   <f-stop>4.5-5.6</f-stop>
>Would the above be incorrect representation in OWL ?
>Would it be correct to do it like this  
>    <focal-length rdf:datatype="&xsd;string">75-300mm zoom</focal-length>
>   <f-stop rdf:datatype="&xsd;string">4.5-5.6</f-stop>
>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..


[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 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:07:47 UTC