- From: Pete Johnston <p.johnston@ukoln.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 12:50:52 -0000
- To: www-rdf-comments@w3.org
Hi, This is really a request for clarification on the descriptions of the rdfs:isDefinedBy property in http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-schema/ I notice that in the table of "RDF Properties" in the RDF Schema Overview section (and in the rdfs:comment in the schema in Appendix B), the description of rdfs:isDefinedBy is: > Indicates the namespace of a resource and further down under RDF Utility Classes and Properties: > The property rdfs:isDefinedBy is a subproperty of rdfs:seeAlso, and > indicates the resource defining the subject resource. A while back I asked a question on dc-architecture about the usage of rdfs:isDefinedBy, and specifically whether rdfs:isDefinedBy could/should be used to express the relationship between a term and a namespace http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0205&L=dc-architecture&T= 0&F=&S=&P=1996 The question spawned a very long debate which I seem to recall spread across several mailing lists, with opposed views presented, particularly at http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0206&L=dc-architecture&T= 0&F=&S=&P=805 [Dan Brickley] which includes ---- rdfs:isDefinedBy probably should have been called rdfs:ns, since we added it to RDF Schema as a way of associating a term with the wider bundle of names it was defined alongside. ---- and http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/wa.exe?A2=ind0206&L=dc-architecture&T= 0&F=&S=&P=1473 [Patrick Stickler] which concludes ---- So the bottom line is that, if you want a property to relate a term to a specific namespace then you need something other than rdfs:isDefinedBy. And ideally, you would also instruct every parser to always assert such statements for every term when parsing. But no existing RDF mechanism provides for unambiguous preservation of namespace structure. ---- I tried to follow the ensuing debate as it surfaced in the archive of the RDF Core WG list, and I think the latest references were in the thread following http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Jun/0027.html [Dan Brickley] This message includes the suggestion ---- For every RDF property there is exactly one correct value for the rdfs:isDefinedBy property. When RDF graphs are written in the RDF/XML 1.0 syntax, this value corresponds to the XML namespace URIref used in the serialized representation of the RDF properties. ---- While I must admit this approach rather appealed to me (and I think that convention is used, for example, in the RDFS representations of the DCMI vocabularies), I also understand the argument that namespaces do not exist in RDF and I thought that later contributions on that thread e.g. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Jun/0031.html http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Jun/0147.html reflected opposition to this very "tight" description of rdfs:isDefinedBy, and it was considered inappropriate to limit rdfs:isDefinedBy in this way. This would seem to be reflected in this message http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2002JulSep/0095.htm l on the resolution of the issue. But the text in the recent draft (especially the phrase "Indicates the namespace of a resource") seems to re-introduce some ambiguity on whether (a) the value of rdfs:isDefinedBy is (in all cases?) the XML namespace URIref used to represent a property in the XML serialization, or (b) it is a reference to _any_ resource providing more information (which _may_ be an XML namespace URIref, which _may_ point to a schema (an RDF/XML document), but might not be). Regards, Pete Johnston ------- Pete Johnston Interoperability Research Officer UKOLN, University of Bath, Bath BA2 7AY, UK tel: +44 (0)1225 383619 fax: +44 (0)1225 386838 mailto:p.johnston@ukoln.ac.uk http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/ukoln/staff/p.johnston/
Received on Friday, 22 November 2002 08:06:22 UTC