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

Re: DAML+OIL bug (namespace vs baseuri)

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2001 09:37:22 -0500
Message-ID: <3B35FB22.74E47632@w3.org>
To: Sean Bechhofer <seanb@cs.man.ac.uk>
CC: www-rdf-logic@w3.org
Sean Bechhofer wrote:
> 
> I think there may be an error in the the DAML+OIL example at
> http://www.daml.org/2001/03/daml+oil-ex.daml.

The bug is that this address was used to refer to the
example ontology. Its name is supposed to be

	http://www.daml.org/2001/03/daml+oil-ex

I've asked the daml.org webmasters to change
the relevant links.
But I still see
$Revision: 1.7 $ of $Date: 2001/03/28 06:26:55 $
which has the buggy links.

Mike, please change those per my
message of Fri, 15 Jun 2001 12:22:10 -0500
to joint-committee.

> It contains the
> following namespace definitions:
> 
> <rdf:RDF
>   xmlns:rdf ="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
>   xmlns:rdfs="http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#"
>   xmlns:daml="http://www.daml.org/2001/03/daml+oil#"
>   xmlns:xsd ="http://www.w3.org/2000/10/XMLSchema#"
>   xmlns:dex ="http://www.daml.org/2001/03/daml+oil-ex#"
>   xmlns:exd ="http://www.daml.org/2001/03/daml+oil-ex-dt#"
>   xmlns     ="http://www.daml.org/2001/03/daml+oil-ex#"
> >
> 
> Later on, we get:
> 
> <daml:Class rdf:ID="Height">
>   <daml:oneOf rdf:parseType="daml:collection">
>     <Height rdf:ID="short"/>
>     <Height rdf:ID="medium"/>
>     <Height rdf:ID="tall"/>
>   </daml:oneOf>
> </daml:Class>
> 
> Now my guess is that the intention here is that this is defining a
> class Height that consists of the three things short, medium and tall,
> each of which are instances of Height. However, it doesn't quite do
> this. The first occurrence of Height (as an rdf:ID attribute value)
> resolves to <baseuri>#Height, which is actually:
> 
> http://www.daml.org/2001/03/daml+oil-ex.daml#Height

That's buggy.

> whereas the other occurrences of Height (as an element) are resolved to:
> 
> http://www.daml.org/2001/03/daml+oil-ex#Height

That's the intended name.

> due to the use of the default namespace. Is this just a typo (i.e. the
> default ns should really be ....daml+oil-x.daml#) or is there
> something more going on here? I guess that using xml-base (or some
> similar mechanism) might help to alleviate these problems as the
> baseuri of the resources within the description would then be
> explicit.


-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Sunday, 24 June 2001 10:37:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:52:40 GMT