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


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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 2 March 2016 11:10:35 UTC