Re: N3 vs. XML

Drew,

correction: the ouput should actually look like

<!-- Processed by Id: cwm.py,v 1.46 2001/05/21 14:35:47 connolly Exp -->
<!--     using base file:/n3/sensor.n3-->


<rdf:RDF xmlns:control="foo:control#"
    xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
    xmlns:math="foo:math#"
    xmlns:sensor="foo:sensor#"
    xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/log#">

    <rdf:Description>
        <is rdf:parseType=":quote">
            <rdf:Description rdf:about="foo:sensor#thermostat">
                <math:greaterThan>30</math:greaterThan>
            </rdf:Description>
        </is>
        <implies rdf:parseType=":quote">
            <rdf:Description rdf:about="foo:control#furnace">
                <control:setTo>1</control:setTo>
            </rdf:Description>
        </implies>
    </rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>

(so with 'is' and 'quote' in http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/log# )
which is to my knowledge perfect RDF/XML
e.g. Sirpac gives
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
triple("file:sensor.rdf#genid1", "http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/log#is", litera
l("
            <rdf:Description xmlns:rdf='http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-
ns#' rdf:about='foo:sensor#thermostat'>
                <math:greaterThan xmlns:math='foo:math#'>30</math:greaterThan>
            </rdf:Description>
        "))
triple("file:sensor.rdf#genid1", "http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/log#implies", l
iteral("
            <rdf:Description xmlns:rdf='http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-
ns#' rdf:about='foo:control#furnace'>
                <control:setTo xmlns:control='foo:control#'>1</control:setTo>
            </rdf:Description>
        "))
Total statements: 2
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
and Jena gives
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<rdf:RDF
  xmlns:rdf='http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#'
  xmlns:RDFNsId0='http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/log#' >
  <rdf:Description rdf:about='#RDFAnonId1'>
    <RDFNsId0:is>
            &lt;rdf:Description rdf:about=&quot;foo:sensor#thermostat&quot;&gt;
                &lt;math:greaterThan&gt;30&lt;/math:greaterThan&gt;
            &lt;/rdf:Description&gt;
        </RDFNsId0:is>
    <RDFNsId0:implies>
            &lt;rdf:Description rdf:about=&quot;foo:control#furnace&quot;&gt;
                &lt;control:setTo&gt;1&lt;/control:setTo&gt;
            &lt;/rdf:Description&gt;
        </RDFNsId0:implies>
  </rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(there is still no canonical pasrer output format, but that's another problem)

Of course, the current RDF processors are not further parsing the quoted
(don't shoot the messenger) content, but so what.
So I don't agree with the conclusions in
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-logic/2001May/0218.html and
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-logic/2001May/0301.html

I also would like to refer to
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-interest/2001May/0162.html

> There's an rdf:parseType Quote??

so it actually is log:quote

> Is a triple inside a Quote implicitly reified, or asserted like other
> triples; or does the Quote block the usual assertion convention?

I would say, it is like one would say in Prolog p(s,o):-p1(s1,o1).
so p1(s1,o1) is NOT asserted as a fact (of course).

>
> What if I wanted to say
>
>   (forall (x)
>      {sensor:thermostat  math:equal ?x}
>      log:implies
>      {control:furnace control:setTo ?x})
>
> possibly without the explicit quantifier.  Would Quote still be
> sufficient?

I don't know that syntax, what is it? i also don't understand the question?

--
Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/

Received on Tuesday, 22 May 2001 11:39:59 UTC