- From: Stian Soiland-Reyes <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2011 10:27:41 +0100
- To: Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl>
- Cc: "public-prov-wg@w3.org" <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 09:02, Paul Groth <p.t.groth@vu.nl> wrote: > I was wondering if there were turtle examples for the ontology document. > > I really like the different choice of styles in the owl primer: > http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-primer/ I would really like to see it in Turtle as well - but perhaps there are specification issues with using Turtle (a Team Submission at the time of writing) in a normative document. I would like to see the PROV primer to use Turtle and the abstract syntax side by side - using RDF/XML here would probably make it slightly harder to compare, although it is easier to do nesting of named nodes in RDF/XML. On the other hands, developers not that much into RDF will find it hard to find a standard talking about using an ontology which is described in various different serialisations. Are you suggesting we do a similar "Hide/show" buttons? With RDF/XML, Turtle, abstract syntax.. and also the other OWL syntaxes? (Syntaxii? Syntices?.. well!) I would find it hard to edit the documents at this early stage if this is not automatically maintained - but doing so automatically would not allow us to do "pretty-formatting" - for instance in http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/ontology/ProvenanceFormalModel.html#example-workflow-run I: * Deliberately used classnames <wf:Value> instead of <rdf:Description> with the horrible entity-namespace <rdf:type rdf:resource="&wf;Value"> (This is something else to push the RDF WG on, after all XSD manages this fine) * Did "natural" nesting such as <prov:used> <wf:ValueAtPort> </> * List assertions in semi-chronological order so that resources are asserted before they are used in other assertions Some of the other examples in the ontology don't have complete RDF/XML.. I agree that we should not need to include <rdf:RDF and the namespaces for everything, but should at least include the closing tag </rdf:Description> to not look too odd. I'll fix this today unless anyone screams. -- Stian Soiland-Reyes, myGrid team School of Computer Science The University of Manchester
Received on Friday, 30 September 2011 09:28:31 UTC