- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 05:45:30 -0500 (EST)
- To: bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk
- Cc: public-owl-wg@w3.org
Summary: There are approved URIs for the XSD facets. Result: I think that thus we can use the XSD names for the XSD facets in OWL 1.1. From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk> Subject: A brief primer on Qnames and URIs Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 02:21:34 +0000 [...] > Currently, afaik, XML Schema does not provide URIs for datatype > facets, although it does provide QNames. If we are going to make uris > out of xsd:minInclusive, then we are *coining* those uris. They are > easy to coin, but we're still doing something (and not merely reusing > something XML Schema has done.) Wow, I misremembered the situation. There are approved URIs for the facets, and this has been the case since 2001. From http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/ and also in http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema11-2/ *************** Each built-in datatype in this specification (both ·primitive· and ·derived·) can be uniquely addressed via a URI Reference constructed as follows: 1. the base URI is the URI of the XML Schema namespace 2. the fragment identifier is the name of the datatype For example, to address the int datatype, the URI is: * http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#int Additionally, each facet definition element can be uniquely addressed via a URI constructed as follows: 1. the base URI is the URI of the XML Schema namespace 2. the fragment identifier is the name of the facet For example, to address the maxInclusive facet, the URI is: * http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#maxInclusive Additionally, each facet usage in a built-in datatype definition can be uniquely addressed via a URI constructed as follows: 1. the base URI is the URI of the XML Schema namespace 2. the fragment identifier is the name of the datatype, followed by a period (".") followed by the name of the facet For example, to address the usage of the maxInclusive facet in the definition of int, the URI is: * http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#int.maxInclusive *************** Note, however, that the URIs for the datatypes are *not* the concatenation of their namespace http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema and their local name. For example the URI for integer is http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#integer, not http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchemainteger. One would thus expect that in an OWL or RDF document that the namespace for prefix xsd would be http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema# and not the XML Schema namespace. I wonder what the "unique" bit above is all about. Is the document saying that *any* reference to the built-in type integer has to be via http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#integer? This seems to be a large amount of hubris to me. > Cheers, > Bijan. > > P.S. XML Schema 1.1 refers to the component designator WD: > http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema11-1/#ref-scds Yes, but only to say that SCDs are out of scope. peter
Received on Thursday, 15 November 2007 10:59:08 UTC