- From: Lars Marius Garshol <larsga@garshol.priv.no>
- Date: 07 Oct 2001 20:05:29 +0200
- To: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
I am currently creating an RDF schema, and have found this relatively straightforward, once I figured out how to represent properties outside the class definitions. There were some things I had problems with, however. I assume that it is allowed to have more than one RDF statement in the same model where the subject and the predicate are the same? If so, is there any logical difference between using a bag and just using a set of duplicate property assignments? Are there any practical differences, for example in terms of convenience? Also, when declaring a schema, are there any benefits to declaring a bag instead of an ordinary property, beyond clarity of intention? Is there any way to constrain the cardinality the assignments to an RDF property, whether a container or an ordinary property? Does anyone know of a good RDF Schema tutorial? Is DAML simply a schema language that extends RDF Schema, or is it more than that? Or even something completely different? Does anyone know of a good DAML tutorial? (I've read http://edge.mcs.drexel.edu/GICL/howto/DAML/DAML.htm.) Another question is the status of the RDF Schema specification. Its review period ended 2000-06-15, and yet it is still a candidate recommendation, well over a year later. What is happening with it? My last question is not really related to RDF Schema: are RDF statements also statements about the objects? That is, if I say (word-A, similar-to, word-B), should I then also make the opposite statement lest I imply that while A is similar to B, B is not similar to A? A related question is: how easy is it to traverse RDF statements backwards in RDF tools? Even if the semantics of RDF do not require me to make the similar-to statement both ways, should I do it anyway for reasons of convenience? --Lars M.
Received on Sunday, 7 October 2001 14:05:16 UTC