- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2001 09:37:22 -0500
- 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 UTC