W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webont-wg@w3.org > April 2002

Re: WOWG: first language proposal

From: Jonathan Borden <jonathan@openhealth.org>
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2002 14:23:43 -0500
Message-ID: <023601c1dcd7$6afbf0e0$0a2e249b@nemc.org>
To: "Jeff Heflin" <heflin@cse.lehigh.edu>, "Ian Horrocks" <horrocks@cs.man.ac.uk>
Cc: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>, <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
Jeff Heflin wrote:

> 
> Yes, that is basically what I mean. In an earlier message [1], I gave
> some examples of what an XML syntax for WebOnt might look like. One
> example from that message was:
> 
> <!-- This says that a trio has three members, all of whom are musicians.
> -->
>   <owl:class ID="Trio">
>      <owl:hasProperty ref="#hasMember">
>         <owl:cardinality value="3" />
>         <owl:allvalues>
>            <owl:class ref="#Musician" />
>         </owl:allvalues>
>      </owl:hasProperty>
>   </owl:class>

but in something RDF compatible:

<Class rdf:ID="Trio">
        <subClassOf>
                <Restriction>
                        <onProperty rdf:resource="#hasMember"/>
                        <cardinality>3</cardinality>
                        <rdf:range rdf:resource="#Musician"/>
                </Restriction>
        </subClassOf>
</Class>

which, gosh, isn't all that different, is it?

Jonathan
Received on Friday, 5 April 2002 14:27:15 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:57:49 GMT