Re: Use of XSD namespace in RDF recommendations

 From my little experience of Web ontologies, and according to a recent 
study on the use of OWL terms online [1], very very few.

But all the OWL-2-specific features are showing up very little yet, in 
part because they are not well known (I still see often citations of the 
OWL 1 spec when referring to the standard Web Ontology Language) and in 
part because the new features are more complicated to use. People tend 
to use more what can be expressed with a single triple.

There is also, I believe, a concern about whether this will interoperate 
with other people's applications, since not all semweb apps implement an 
OWL 2 processor.


[1] B. Glimm, A. Hogan, M. Krötzsch, A. Polleres. OWL: Yet to arrive on 
the Web of Data? In Proceedings of LDOW 2012.

Le 04/09/2012 15:37, Dan Brickley a écrit :
> On 4 September 2012 21:11, Antoine Zimmermann
> <antoine.zimmermann@emse.fr>  wrote:
>> FWIW, OWL 2 has a feature to define custom datatypes that can be written
>> completely in RDF, without using XML Schema.
>>
>> Your example for Chapman codes can be written as follows, in Turtle syntax:
>>
>> @prefix geo:<http://www.example.com/geo#>
>> @prefix xsd:<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#>
>> @prefix owl:<http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#>
>> @prefix rdfs:<http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#>
>>
>> geo:chapman-code  a  rdfs:Datatype;
>>      owl:equivalentClass  [
>>          a  rdfs:Datatype;
>>          owl:onDatatype  xsd:string;
>>          owl:withRestriction ( [xsd:pattern "[a-zA-Z]{3}"] )
>>      ] .
>
> Interesting! Are many of these showing up "in the wild" yet?
>
> Dan
>
>

-- 
Antoine Zimmermann
ISCOD / LSTI - Institut Henri Fayol
École Nationale Supérieure des Mines de Saint-Étienne
158 cours Fauriel
42023 Saint-Étienne Cedex 2
France
Tél:+33(0)4 77 42 66 03
Fax:+33(0)4 77 42 66 66
http://zimmer.aprilfoolsreview.com/

Received on Tuesday, 4 September 2012 14:11:14 UTC