W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-openannotation@w3.org > June 2012

Re: RDFS schema files

From: Stian Soiland-Reyes <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 09:43:51 +0100
Message-ID: <CAPRnXtnnNccoH185Y-x5RSoAi_Hsepnd7WZMRAPcA_Xb56PCbA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Bob Morris <morris.bob@gmail.com>
Cc: Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com>, public-openannotation@w3.org
The use of these entities is just an artifact of RDF/XML being a
horrible format subject to the limitations of RDF and never intended
for human reading.

Allowing CURIEs in attribute values is not namespace safe in XML, but
the meaning is always the expanded value.

In Turtle this would read much easier:


(I exported from Protege after adding oa: and oax: prefixes - I also
did a grep -v "^  *$" to remove those blank lines PRotege likes to

On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 12:56 AM, Bob Morris <morris.bob@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm fond of minimalist ontologies that keep an open mind about the
> open world, so I like this at a glance. But I haven't looked yet to
> see if I think it lines up well with the Data Model).

> One syntactic issue about which I hope someone can point me to an
> authority proving me wrong:  It's common practice in RDF/XML to have a
> DTD with XML entity declarations and use corresponding entity
> references in xml attributes, assuming that they will be expanded.
> Example: <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="&rdfs;Resource"/>
> But to the best of my understanding, nothing in the RDF/XML
> specification requires that the RDF/XML serialization be valid for a
> DTD or XML-Schema. In particular, I believe nothing guarantees that
> the value of this the example is anything other than the exact
> contents of the quoted string, and I think that an RDF/XML parser that
> behaves that way is nevertheless, and horrifyingly, compliant with the
> RDF/XML spec.  I hope I am wrong, because that use of entity reference
> makes a less annoying RDF file.  I even like to use them in the value
> of namespace declarations, because then the only thing you really have
> to edit is the DTD....
> So please, please, would someone point me at something in an RDF/XML
> spec that I can understand implies that entity references must be
> expanded; (ideally the something wouldn't make me bite the bullet and
> understand something deep about infosets.  :-)  )
> Bob
> On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 3:16 PM, Robert Sanderson <azaroth42@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Dear all,
>> If you have a moment, please check out the schema files for both the
>> core and extension models.
>> http://www.openannotation.org/spec/core/core-schema.xml
>> http://www.openannotation.org/spec/extension/extension-schema.xml
>> Before we put them up on the W3C site (which takes a bit more effort)
>> Many thanks,
>> Rob
> --
> Robert A. Morris
> Emeritus Professor  of Computer Science
> UMASS-Boston
> 100 Morrissey Blvd
> Boston, MA 02125-3390
> IT Staff
> Filtered Push Project
> Harvard University Herbaria
> Harvard University
> email: morris.bob@gmail.com
> web: http://efg.cs.umb.edu/
> web: http://etaxonomy.org/mw/FilteredPush
> http://www.cs.umb.edu/~ram
> ===
> The content of this communication is made entirely on my
> own behalf and in no way should be deemed to express
> official positions of The University of Massachusetts at Boston or
> Harvard University.

Stian Soiland-Reyes, myGrid team
School of Computer Science
The University of Manchester
Received on Monday, 25 June 2012 08:44:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:38:07 UTC