- From: Dom Vonarburg <dvonarbu@yahoo.com>
- Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 10:43:53 -0700 (PDT)
- To: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
Hi everyone, I am working on a vocabulary but the following issue keeps bugging me: What is the best way or best practice for using properties incrementally in an RDF document, so that parser applications can choose the degree of meaning they can or want to understand. I couldn't find any documents on this topic. Here is an example: I want to say that resource-1 is related to resource-2: <Description rdf:ID="resource-1"> <relatedTo rdf:resource="resource-2"/> </Description> But now I want to add that resource-2 is really a child resource of resource-1 (for example), without forcing the parser application (RDF or non-RDF) to undertand this new deeper relationship. After defining hasChild as a sub-property of relatedTo, the most obvious solution is this: <Description rdf:ID="resource-1"> <hasChild rdf:resource="resource-2"/> </Description> But the relationship between relatedTo and hasChild can only be understood by an RDF parser (and one that reads the schema). Another solution could be this: <Description rdf:ID="resource-1"> <relatedTo rdf:resource="resource-2"/> <hasChild rdf:resource="resource-2"/> </Description> But now, we have two relationships. Another one could be to insert a blank node to further qualify the original property and use rdf:value: <Description rdf:ID="resource-1"> <relatedTo rdf:parseType="Resource"> <property rdf:resource="hasChild"/> <rdf:value rdf:resource="resource-2"/> </relatedTo> </Description> Are there other alternatives? Thank you! Dom Vonarburg dvonarbu@yahoo.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
Received on Saturday, 2 October 2004 15:34:49 UTC