RE: What's the difference? rdf:about, owl:sameIndividualAs

> I would add the following to the "confusing" list:
>     rdf:ID
>     rdf:Description

I agree.  The attribute, rdf:ID, seems to be redundant and only in the
spec for backwards compatibility.  For instance, "rdf:ID='foo'" is the
same as "rdf:about='#foo'", right?

>     rdf:resource

I disagree, as that attribute provides a sort-of opposite for rdf:about,
where rdf:about identifies a subject and rdf:resource identifies an
object ("linguistically" not "object-orientedly").

>     rdf:parseType

Could the concept for rdf:parseType be better expressed as a processing
instruction?  After all, it changes how a fragment of the serialized xml
is processed (between RDF and non-RDF for instance).

> From a user's point of view, I think it's preferable to use
> only simple constructs like
>     X  individualOf  Z
>     Y  subClassOf   Z
> where X,Y,Z are Qnames.

I am designing a markup language, which uses serialized RDF, for an
internal application.  I think that the RDF sections will use a
restricted subset of the official specification.  Perhaps two or three
different versions of RDF/XML would be helpful - each with greater
restrictions (such as limited/no properties-as-attributes, no
"parseType" attributes, etc.)?

--
Jimmy Cerra


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard H. McCullough [mailto:rhm@cdepot.net]
> Sent: Saturday, May 17, 2003 5:56 AM
> To: jimbobbs@hotmail.com; www-rdf-logic@w3.org
> Subject: Re: What's the difference? rdf:about, owl:sameIndividualAs
> 
> I agree with the spirit of Jimmy's remarks.
> I would add the following to the "confusing" list:
>     rdf:ID
>     rdf:resource
>     rdf:parseType
>     rdf:Description
> 
> From a user's point of view, I think it's preferable to use
> only simple constructs like
>     X  individualOf  Z
>     Y  subClassOf   Z
> where X,Y,Z are Qnames.
> 
> Dick McCullough
> knowledge := man do identify od existent done;
> knowledge haspart proposition list;
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jimmy Cerra" <jimbobbs@hotmail.com>
> To: <www-rdf-logic@w3.org>
> Sent: Friday, May 16, 2003 8:24 PM
> Subject: What's the difference? rdf:about, owl:sameIndividualAs
> 
> 
> >
> > What's the difference between rdf:about and owl:sameIndividualAs?
They
> > all seem to be used to define a resource.  Take the following
example:
> >
> > <owl:Thing rdf:about="uri#foo" />
> >
> > That serialized RDF statement says that a resource, identified by
> > "uri#foo", is an individual (as defined by OWL).  However, I could
also
> > say that a blank node that is identical to the resource identified
by
> > "uri#foo" is an individual:
> >
> > <owl:Thing>
> > <owl:sameIndividualAs rdf:resource="uri#foo" />
> > </owl:Thing>
> >
> > >From that statement, an agent should conclude that the resource
> > identified by "uri#foo" has the same properties as that blank node.
> > Since the blank node is an individual, then the resource identified
by
> > "uri#foo" must have the same properties - mainly that it is an
> > individual.  So rdf:about and owl:sameIndividualAs can be used to
> > identify a resource; the former by direct statements and the latter
by
> > inference.
> >
> > Is it really necessary to have two different ways of saying the same
> > thing?  Perhaps so; then would it be advantageous to make the
rdf:about
> > attribute an actual property?  For example:
> >
> > <owl:Thing>
> > <rdf:about>uri#foo</rdf:about>
> > <rdf:about>uri#bar</rdf:about>
> > </owl:Thing>
> >
> > or:
> >
> > <owl:Thing>
> > <rdf:about rdf:resource="uri#foo" />
> > <rdf:about rdf:resource="uri#bar" />
> > </owl:Thing>
> >
> > as opposed to:
> >
> > <owl:Thing rdf:about="uri#foo">
> > <owl:sameIndividualAs rdf:resource="uri#bar" />
> > </owl:Thing>
> >
> > or:
> >
> > <owl:Thing>
> > <owl:sameIndividualAs rdf:resource="uri#foo" />
> > <owl:sameIndividualAs rdf:resource="uri#bar" />
> > </owl:Thing>
> >
> > ???
> >
> > --
> > Jimmy Cerra
> >
> > ] "My mind is slipping away...
> > ]  day by glorious day." - RAG III
> >
> >

Received on Monday, 19 May 2003 02:43:04 UTC