- From: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2000 17:22:43 +0000
- To: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
I have been working on an RDF/XML parser for Redland, the RDF system that I created, and while doing that I created some reference notes that other people dealing with the syntax might find useful. I needed to know what were all the "rdf:" and "rdfs:" things that a parser could expect to find in the syntax, as defined in RDF and RDFS, and what to do with them. I collected this information and have now made it available as a document: RDF Concepts Reference http://www.redland.opensource.ac.uk/notes/concepts.html I also loaded the rdfs data (read only) into the Redland RDF demo to help check this stuff. It is quite easy to do, just select the links from http://www.redland.opensource.ac.uk/demo?db=rdfs;command=print This work showed me some things I found interesting - Container concepts match two grammar productions (we already knew this) Container concepts have a rdf:type but that was only defined in RDF Schema as rdfs:Class. RDF M&S just said: "resource and not property" rdf:li is just syntax, and has no defined meaning as an attribute rdf:value is not defined in the formal grammar or formal model RDFS schema contains extra not-needed rdf:type statements [please ignore statement/statings issue here] rdfs:ConstraintProperty is the only class that is a subclass of two other classes. Why? many concepts have no defined meaning as attributes in the syntax Dave
Received on Tuesday, 12 December 2000 12:22:45 UTC