- From: Keith Waters <kwaters@ftrd.us>
- Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 12:03:58 -0400
- To: www-di@w3.org
Hi Jeremy and Mark, This message contains a response to comments on http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-DPF-20041122/ Tree or Graph? I am currently using a Microsoft Windows OS, it gives me a tree like view of my computer hardware, under the device manager. I can choose between two views of the devices Devices by type Devices by Connection My understanding is that when I look at the properties of my DVD drive it is the same drive whether it's parent is a USB Mass Storage device whose parent is the USB Hub, or if its parent is DVD/CD-ROM drives whose parent is my computer. So I am presented with two different trees whose leaf nodes are the same sets. This seems to be a highly desirable feature if the goal is to allow different applications integrating devices from different manufacturers, since the different people involved with the development of the various applications and devices will have different views of the world. These different views will be reflected in different choices about how to structure their representation of the world, yet ... some of the concepts being used are the same and do represent the same devices. We note that even in the more tightly controlled world of a Microsoft OS it is helpful to have multiple views. In the XML world, it is natural to try to describe the world using tree like views. However, as RDF is a graph, it is possible to have a flexible representation where leaf nodes can be reached by multiple routes, accomodating different views of the world. Being able to accomodate such multiple views may be important as the goal here is to allow different applications integrating devices from different manufacturers. These different views will be reflected in different choices about how to structure their representation of the world, yet ... some of the concepts being used are the same and do represent the same devices. RDF also stresses the idea that such representations should be designed from a semantic, rather than a syntatic viewpoint, and uses URIs to unambiguously identify subjects and properties. This approach should be used when designing representations in DPF. Specifically DPF can gain some of these advantages if two small changes are made to DPFProperty: - permit multiple parents (not simply one or zero) - add a label, either a URI or a locally scoped identifier which identifies the instance which is the value of this property (when no literal value, string or other is given) The DPF Working Group agree. The DPF is represented as a tree. -Keith Waters
Received on Monday, 6 June 2005 21:55:46 UTC