- From: Hans Teijgeler <hans.teijgeler@quicknet.nl>
- Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 12:27:19 +0200
- To: <public-rdf-comments@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <F7DE25DEBAA741FEA6306252D63C4291@HansPC>
Good afternoon,
Perhaps it is useful to show one example of a standardized ISO 15926
"template":
<p7tpl:ClassOfAssemblyDefinition
rdf:ID="T220df765-e55f-11e1-aff1-0800200c9a66">
<rdf:type rdf:resource="&owl;Thing"/>
<p7tpl:hasUrClassOfWhole
rdf:resource="#Cd3cbfad0-e53a-11e1-aff1-0800200c9a66"/>
<p7tpl:hasClassOfWhole
rdf:resource="#C220df766-e55f-11e1-aff1-0800200c9a66"/>
<p7tpl:hasUrClassOfPart
rdf:resource="#Cd3cbfada-e53a-11e1-aff1-0800200c9a66"/>
<p7tpl:hasClassOfPart
rdf:resource="#C220df767-e55f-11e1-aff1-0800200c9a66"/>
<p7tpl:hasCardinalityOfWhole
rdf:resource="&xyzrdl;Ce269fc70-678a-11e1-b86c-0800200c9a66"/>
<p7tpl:hasCardinalityOfPart
rdf:resource="&xyzrdl;Ce269fc71-678a-11e1-b86c-0800200c9a66"/>
<p7tpl:annRecordCreated
rdf:datatype="&xsd;dateTime">2013-02-08T16:19:00Z</p7tpl:annRecordCreated>
</p7tpl:ClassOfAssemblyDefinition>
That template is an owl:Class and has been defined in OWL with onProperty
plus onClass or onDataRange.
The URI of this template instance is simply the base-URI#ID.
That also holds for all declared objects, like above-mentioned UrClass:
<dm:ClassOfInanimatePhysicalObject
rdf:ID="Cd3cbfad0-e53a-11e1-aff1-0800200c9a66"> <!-- UrClass -->
<rdf:type rdf:resource="&owl;Class"/>
<rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="&rdl;RDS6809993"/> <!-- Piping System -->
<rdfs:label>B14-RZ17803-3"</rdfs:label>
<meta:annRecordCreated
rdf:datatype="&xsd;dateTime">2013-02-08T16:19:00Z</meta:annRecordCreated>
</dm:ClassOfInanimatePhysicalObject>
The entire RDF data set consists of such declared objects and information
about them in the form of these templates.
Do we still have to extend that base-URI with .well-known/genid/ ? Mind
you, this will be used for lifecycle information integration of a facility
(e.g. oil refinery) over 50 years or so, so petabybes of triples, ALL having
this .well-known/genid/ in their URIs.
Regards,
Hans
Hans Teijgeler,
Laanweg 28,
1871 BJ Schoorl,
Netherlands
<http://www.mnei.nl/> www.mnei.nl
_____
From: Hans Teijgeler [mailto:hans.teijgeler@quicknet.nl]
Sent: vrijdag 31 mei 2013 11:14
To: 'public-rdf-comments@w3.org'
Subject: RDF 1.1 - Skolem IRI
Good morning,
We use http://www.w3.org/TR/swbp-n-aryRelations/#useCase3 throughout.
Are you saying that Purchase_1 in the shown code:
:Purchase_1
a :Purchase ;
:has_buyer :John ;
:has_object :Lenny_The_Lion ;
:has_purpose :Birthday_Gift ;
:has_amount 15 ;
:has_seller :books.example.com .
shall have a Skolem IRI? If so, why for Pete's sake?
And if so, must we really waste storage space by adding .well-known/genid/
to those IRI's?
Regards,
Hans
OntoConsult,
Hans Teijgeler,
Laanweg 28,
1871 BJ Schoorl,
Netherlands
<http://www.15926.org> www.15926.org
Received on Friday, 31 May 2013 10:27:47 UTC