- 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