- From: Lee Jonas <lee.jonas@cakehouse.co.uk>
- Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2001 16:29:47 -0000
- To: "'Jeremy Carroll'" <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, www-rdf-interest@w3.org
Good point. I have a couple of ideas on this: 1) a second level of indirection. 2) approximate by using an 'Alt' collection. No. 2 doesn't seem quite right somehow. In MIME parlance it represents a multipart/alternative whereas what I think you want is similar to a multipart/parallel. Perhaps there should be a new type of collection in RDF2 to cater for this? Thinking about it, this could be one way to specify resource equivalence generally. Any comments anyone? Regards Lee -----Original Message----- From: Jeremy Carroll [mailto:jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com] Sent: 13 March 2001 15:44 To: www-rdf-interest@w3.org Subject: Weights and Measures Lee Jonas wrote: > -----Original Message----- > Sent: 12 March 2001 16:38 > To: www-rdf-interest@w3.org > Subject: Re: Again: Anonymous Resources [..omit..] > However, consider the example the RDF M&S spec gives for qualified values. > It describes measurements as the coupling of the unit of measurement with > the quantity via an intermediary resource, e.g. 8-Kg, 128-Mb, > 2-meters, etc. I am new to RDF, (I've just started working with Brian McBride); I had to go and look at the spec to understand this, and I was surprised. From the spec http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-rdf-syntax/ : ---------------- A common use of this higher-arity capability is when dealing with units of measure. A person's weight is not just a number such as "200", it also includes the unit of measure used. In this case we might be using either pounds or kilograms. We could use a relationship with an additional arc to record the fact that John Smith is a rather strapping gentleman: <RDF xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:n="http://www.nist.gov/units/"> <Description about="John_Smith"> <n:weight rdf:parseType="Resource"> <rdf:value>200</rdf:value> <n:units rdf:resource="http://www.nist.gov/units/Pounds"/> </n:weight> </Description> </RDF> ------------------- This is counterintuitive in that it (incorrectly) gives only one (numeric) value for John Smith's weight. It is natural, at least to me, to want to augment the above graph with John's weight in Kilo's. This is a further attribute of John's weight, rather than an additional description of John. Unfortunately, the following is unintelligible: <RDF xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:n="http://www.nist.gov/units/"> <Description about="John_Smith"> <n:weight rdf:parseType="Resource"> <rdf:value>200</rdf:value> <n:units rdf:resource="http://www.nist.gov/units/Pounds"/> <rdf:value>91</rdf:value> <n:units rdf:resource="http://www.nist.gov/units/Kilograms"/> </n:weight> </Description> </RDF> And, this one, seems to suggest John has two different weights: <RDF xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:n="http://www.nist.gov/units/"> <Description about="John_Smith"> <n:weight rdf:parseType="Resource"> <rdf:value>200</rdf:value> <n:units rdf:resource="http://www.nist.gov/units/Pounds"/> </n:weight> <n:weight rdf:parseType="Resource"> <rdf:value>91</rdf:value> <n:units rdf:resource="http://www.nist.gov/units/Kilograms"/> </n:weight> </Description> </RDF> I would prefer to see the weight with two properties, one the weight in Kilo's another the weight in pounds. Both of these properties could be subproperties of rdf:value. This might suggest: <RDF xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:n="http://www.nist.gov/units/"> <Description about="John_Smith"> <n:weight rdf:parseType="Resource"> <n:Pounds>200</n:Pounds> <n:Kilograms>91</n:Kilograms> </n:weight> </Description> </RDF> Such an approach allows for additive extensions of models to support additional measurement systems, rather than requiring the transformation of a model from say a metric to an imperial system. Moreover, if the weight node were not anonymous, then this addition could come from a separate document generated automatically by say a units' conversion program. A particularly nasty variant is the English habit of quoting body weights in Stone and Pounds, so if John lives in London, England, he weighs 14 Stone and 4 pounds, extending the graph further gives: <RDF xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:n="http://www.nist.gov/units/"> <Description about="John_Smith"> <n:weight rdf:parseType="Resource"> <n:Pounds>200</n:Pounds> <n:Kilograms>91</n:Kilograms> <n:Stone rdf:parseType="Resource"> <n:Stone>14</n:Stone> <n:Pounds>4</n:Pounds> </n:Stone> </n:weight> </Description> </RDF> where the semantics of the pair of arcs <n:Pounds>200</n:Pounds> and <n:Stone rdf:parseType="Resource"/> is that of alternative description, whereas the pair of arcs <n:Stone>14</n:Stone> & <n:Pounds>4</n:Pounds> Jeremy Carroll HP Labs, Bristol
Received on Tuesday, 13 March 2001 11:30:23 UTC