Re: RDFS / OWL to HTML

Hi Sergio,

 >I don't agree to use XML tools to work over RDF or OWL. IMO this a

 >common error: even if we're working over its serialization in RDF/XML,
 >treat it as XML is not the best approach.

I think your statement is too general. While I fully agree that one 
should not operate on RDF/XML data at the XML level **when handling 
content**, I think it can be a fair approach to do so for rendering 
vocabularies. Quite clearly, OWL2XHTML cannot list implicit things in 
the given OWL ontology; still it is a handy, lightweight way of 
generating a nice documentation of a given ontology. Stil, the resulting 
linear documentation has been judged useful by quite some people - for 
an example using our script, see http://purl.org/goodrelations/v1.

Note that we are **not** proposing to use XML transformations  **for 
handling data or knowledge bases**, but just for displaying conceptual 
elements in a Web ontology. The former will quite clearly not work well, 
because there are so many syntactical variants of expressing the same 
meaning, so either the result will be incomplete or the script will be 
overly complex, because it would have to implement the full semantics of 
the underlying language.

Best

Martin





Sergio Fernández wrote:
> Hi,
>
> El dom, 02-11-2008 a las 21:45 +0100, Martin Hepp escribió:
>   
>> for client-side rendering, you can use the OWL2XHTML stylesheet,
>> available at
>>
>> http://www.ebusiness-unibw.org/projects/owl2xhtml/
>>
>> This works without content negotiation - simply include a link to the
>> stylesheet in the header of your vocabulary.
>>     
>
> I don't agree to use XML tools to work over RDF or OWL. IMO this a
> common error: even if we're working over its serialization in RDF/XML,
> treat it as XML is not the best approach. 
>
> BTW, there are some interesting research gaping RDF and XML [1][2].
>
> Best,
>
> [1] http://xsparql.deri.org/
> [2] http://berrueta.net/research/xsltsparql
>
>