- From: Frank Manola <fmanola@mitre.org>
- Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2002 14:48:48 -0500
- To: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- CC: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
The Primer calls RDF a "data model" in several places. Do you want me to change it? If so, can you point me to a short description of what an "abstract syntax" is? Not that I'm particularly willing. I think I know what a data model is, and I think RDF can be reasonably characterized as one: think of the relational data model, restricted to 3-ary relations, integrity constraints that keep literals from being subjects and predicates, and the inference rules defined in the Model Theory instead of an algebraic definition of operators like "join" (or Ted Codd's RM/T model, using binary relations for the properties, unary relations for classes, and a different set of constraints). I was going to cover this in a separate section of the Primer, but don't have the time now. NB: The discussion of abstract syntax in http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-absyn/ isn't adequate. NB: The XQuery folks think they have a data model: http://www.w3.org/TR/query-datamodel/ --Frank pat hayes wrote: > >> I'm wondering about our use of the term data model. >> >> What do folks think about renaming the concepts doc to: >> >> Resource Description Framework (RDF) Concepts and Abstract Syntax > > > A VERY good idea. I have never known what a data model was supposed to be. > > Pat > > > -- Frank Manola The MITRE Corporation 202 Burlington Road, MS A345 Bedford, MA 01730-1420 mailto:fmanola@mitre.org voice: 781-271-8147 FAX: 781-271-875
Received on Wednesday, 30 October 2002 15:26:51 UTC