W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > July 2005

Re: UBL Naming Conventions & RDF

From: Ian Davis <iand@internetalchemy.org>
Date: Fri, 08 Jul 2005 11:14:56 +0100
Message-ID: <42CE5220.9050508@internetalchemy.org>
To: John McClure <jmcclure@hypergrove.com>
CC: semantic-web@w3.org

On 07/07/2005 22:09, John McClure wrote:

> So, my task has been to "take apart" the RDF's predicate construct, 
> distinguishing between predicate verbs and predicate nouns. A predicate 
> verb is simply <has> while a predicate noun is (or could be) <Parent>. 
> So rather than <Person><hasParent rdf:resource='uri'/></Person>, I am 
> suggesting that the pattern <Person><has><Parent 
> rdf:about='uri'/></has></Person> be used instead. Many advantages are 
> apparent from this approach, while there appears to be few or 
> no disadvantages.

I think it's perfectly acceptable to use nouns as predicates. In fact at 
[1] I proposed renaming some existing terms from the relationship schema [2]

In your example above, you might write:

<Person> <parent> <Person rdf about='uri'/> </parent> </Person>

to be read as Person has parent 'Person with uri'

However this naming isn't always possible, at least not without entering 
convulutions of syntax. For example how would foaf:knows be rewritten?



[1] http://rdfweb.org/pipermail/rdfweb-dev/2004-March/012836.html
[2] http://vocab.org/relationship/
http://internetalchemy.org | http://purl.org/NET/iand
Working on... Silkworm <http://silkworm.talis.com/>
Received on Friday, 8 July 2005 10:15:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 5 July 2022 08:44:53 UTC