RE: What is it that's wrong with rdf:List [summary]

Jeremy Carroll wrote:

> From the OWL mentality, the right way to serialize OWL is as OWL/XML or
>Functional Syntax, so if you want a user level list just introduce
>my:List and be done with it.
>The only reason for wnating rdf:List to work is to get 'nice'
>serialization in RDF/XML and N3 and to have RDF  level list support.

Even OWL DL users might want to make use of existing vocabularies/ontologies
that use lists as semantic entities. For example, DL folks might want to
make use of SKOS ordered collections, e.g.:

  ex:WM2006Heros rdf:type skos:OrderedCollection ;
      skos:memberList ( dbpedia:Italy dbpedia:France dbpedia:Germany ) .


  "The rdfs:range of skos:memberList is the class rdf:List." 

(SKOS semantic condition S34). Using a "my:List" wouldn't be very helpful

Does anyone know of any other vocabularies that use RDF lists beyond the use
as argument lists for OWL constructs?


Dipl.-Inform. Michael Schneider
Research Scientist, Information Process Engineering (IPE)
Tel  : +49-721-9654-726
Fax  : +49-721-9654-727
WWW  :
FZI Forschungszentrum Informatik an der Universität Karlsruhe
Haid-und-Neu-Str. 10-14, D-76131 Karlsruhe
Tel.: +49-721-9654-0, Fax: +49-721-9654-959
Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts, Az 14-0563.1, RP Karlsruhe
Vorstand: Prof. Dr.-Ing. Rüdiger Dillmann, Dipl. Wi.-Ing. Michael Flor,
Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Wolffried Stucky, Prof. Dr. Rudi Studer
Vorsitzender des Kuratoriums: Ministerialdirigent Günther Leßnerkraus

Received on Tuesday, 22 June 2010 10:55:39 UTC