Re: Use of XSD namespace in RDF recommendations

Dan,

 the question is of course justified, but I should also add that, in fact, very very few people use xmls schema datatype definitions together with RDF, too. In both cases the difficulty is identical: to understand and process those datatypes an external 'tool' has to be brought in: either an xml schema or an owl processor... Mainly in a non-XML RDF world (ie, as Richard said, with a diminishing usage of RDF/XML) the chance of using XML schema based derived datatypes is getting smaller and smaller in my view.

I find the OWL 2 datatype definition possibilities one of the most interesting and potentially important part of OWL 2. I actually wish the relevant part of the specification was also made more known and possibly used in isolation; at present it is burried in the overall OWL 2 spec, which is of course not an easy read...

(Maybe it is worth some extra blog/note)

Ivan

---
Ivan Herman
Tel:+31 641044153
http://www.ivan-herman.net

(Written on mobile, sorry for brevity and misspellings...)



On 4 Sep 2012, at 15:37, Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org> wrote:

> 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
>

Received on Tuesday, 4 September 2012 17:38:54 UTC