W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > July 2004

RE: DC with RDF Modeling Questions

From: David Price <david.price@eurostep.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 16:27:46 +0100
To: <kurt.godden@gm.com>, <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Message-ID: <003a01c46f37$4648b130$2101a8c0@esukpc20>
I was asked independently what this diagram meant. The diagram is not
formal. It is copied from a usage guide for an ISO standard that includes
the requirement in question. The standard is ISO 10303-239 Product Life
Cycle Support which is part of the STEP series of standards. This bit is
actually identical is several other ISO 10303 standards that reuse the same
definitions as the concept is quite general.

 

We're in the process of beginning to translate this standard into OWL and if
it's of interest you can contact me outside the exploder for more info.

 

Cheers,

David

 

-----Original Message-----
From: www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org
[mailto:www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of David Price
Sent: 21 July 2004 10:44
To: kurt.godden@gm.com; www-rdf-interest@w3.org
Subject: RE: DC with RDF Modeling Questions

 

On:

 

Q3:  It seems to me that a part number is a version/edition/adaptation of an
engineering name, and thus it is reasonable to model the relationship with
dc:hasVersion, as in the following instance:

 

<EngineeringName rdf:about="12F/0100A">

       <dc:title> Body Control Module</dc:title>

      <dc:hasVersion> <rdf:Bag>  <rdf:li  PN1234 />  <rdf:li PN5678/>
</rdf:Bag></dc:hasVersion> </EngineeringName>

 

There are actually standard models for dealing with this idea. They work
along the lines of:

 

Figure 1 -  The concept of identification  

 

 

Cheers,

David

 

> -----Original Message-----

> From: www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org [mailto:www-rdf-interest-

> request@w3.org] On Behalf Of kurt.godden@gm.com

> Sent: 20 July 2004 17:07

> To: www-rdf-interest@w3.org

> Cc: kurt.godden@gm.com

> Subject: DC with RDF Modeling Questions

> 

> 

> I'm developing an RDF application, but I have some questions that I have

> not found in the W3C documentation, in case any kind soul feels like

> helping me.

> 

> It is clear that I should re-use existing ontologies whenever possible.

> Thus, I am using some of the Dublin Core elements/refinements, e.g. I'm

> using dc:title to hold the primary info of a class called

> "EngineeringName"

> that I'm using to encode a list of existing corporate terms.

> 

> Q1:  Should I still define any dc concepts in RDFS?  (I'm guessing 'yes',

> but it's not clear to me.)

> 

> Q2:  Is the use of QNames ok in the value of an rdf:ID attribute, as with

> the following 'dc:title', where I also have the appropriate namespace

> assignment to the prefix?

> 

> <rdf:Property rdf:ID="dc:title"/>          <--- Is 'dc:title' OK to use

> this way????  Should I use an entity instead of the prefix????

>      <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#EngineeringName"/>

> </rdf:Property>

> 

> Separate topic:

> 

> Each engineering object, e.g. a body control module, gets realized in

> physical form as parts shipped from suppliers.  For a given engineering

> object, there may be more than one corresponding part number (e.g. PN 1234

> from supplier A and PN5678 from supplier B may both be functionally

> equivalent body control modules).  I want to have a pointer from the

> resource representing the engineering object to a bag of such part numbers

> that represent the physical realizations of that object.

> 

> Q3:  It seems to me that a part number is a version/edition/adaptation of

> an engineering name, and thus it is reasonable to model the relationship

> with dc:hasVersion, as in the following instance:

> 

> <EngineeringName rdf:about="12F/0100A">

>        <dc:title> Body Control Module</dc:title>

>       <dc:hasVersion> <rdf:Bag>  <rdf:li  PN1234 />  <rdf:li PN5678/>

> </rdf:Bag></dc:hasVersion>

> </EngineeringName>

> 

> Does this appear reasonable/correct to you?

> 

> Thanks, in advance.

> 

> 

> Kurt Godden

> GM Technical Fellow

> GM R&D, Warren, MI

> ph: 586-986-0445; em: kurt.godden@gm.com

> 

> "I distrust a research person who is always obviously busy on a task."

>    ---Robert A. Frosch, VP (retired), GM Research

> 

> 

 




image001.jpg
(image/jpeg attachment: image001.jpg)

Received on Wednesday, 21 July 2004 11:29:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:14:58 UTC