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

proposal: Structured Datatypes

From: Jonathan Borden <jonathan@openhealth.org>
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2002 22:29:23 -0500
Message-ID: <002b01c28544$b40fcd40$7c674544@ne.mediaone.net>
To: <www-webont-wg@w3.org>

I would like to propose a partial yet relatively simple and interim solution
to the issue of Structured Datatypes. A full solution would involve
'grafting' the OWL class hierarchy onto the XML Schema type system i.e. an
XML Schema type is considered a first class OWL class, and an OWL reasoner
understands XML Schema type derivation composition etc.

For the interim I propose when rdfs:range restrictions on
owl:DatatypeProperty classes are URIs that identify XML datatypes (leaving
alone for the moment the question about how one associates a URI with an XML
datatype) that the lexical value of the owl:DatatypeProperty be an RDF
datatype conforming to the syntax of rdf:XMLLiteral and that this fragment
of XML be valid with respect to the particular XML datatype (e.g. XML Schema
particle)

For example suppose the XML Schema particle

< xsd:complexType name =" xType " id="xType">
 < xsd:sequence >
   < xsd:element name ="a" type =" xsd:int " minOccurs =" 0 " />
   < xsd:element name ="b" type =" xsd:string " minOccurs =" 0 " />
 </ xsd:sequence >
</ xsd:complexType >

then (modulo base URIs)

<owl:DatatypeProperty rdf:ID="xDTprop">
    <rdfs:range rdf:resource="#xType"/>
</owl:DatatypeProperty>

and

<rdf:Description rdf:ID="foo">
    <ex:xDTprop rdf:parseType="Literal">
            <a>123</a>
            <b>asdaasd</b>
     </ex:xDTprop>
</rdf:Description>

By this mechanism fragments of XML such as "<a>1234</a><b>asdasd</b>" which
are valid w.r.t the type "#xType" and are considered individuals/members of
the class "#xDTprop"

Jonathan
Received on Tuesday, 5 November 2002 22:48:49 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:57:55 GMT