Re: The URI of a RDDL "nature" wrote:
> ...
> Well, I think that the nature of an XML document may well be  
> determined,
> or at least bounded, by the >QName< of the root element.  I don't  
> think
> the namespace does it. Consider a single namespace that includes  
> two or
> more element QNames both of which were designed to be used as root
> elements.  For example, I might in the same namespace (shown with  
> prefix
> ns:) have:
>         <ns:purchaseOrder>
>         ....
>         </ns:purchaseOrder>
> and also
>         <ns:invoice>
>         ....
>         </ns:invoice>
> Surely it's wrong to say that the nature of these documents is  
> determined
> by their namespaces.  One's a purchase order, the other an  
> invoice.  Both
> are in the same namespace.  I think RDDL should be capable of  
> capturing
> these separate natures.

RDDL can. If we consider the rddl:nature as determining an rdf:type  
then this is the same as type inheritance.

e.g. one can say that the "nature" of all documents which match the  


is that they all have root elements which are qualified by the  
namespace <ns:>

Documents with a root: <ns:purchaseOrder> are a sub-class of these  
just as are documents with a root <ns:invoice>

Moreover the author of the namespace document is asserting the  
rddl:nature so this can be as specific as is needed. Using the root  
element namespace is meant to be a guide.

If we can't use the root element namespace as a guide we just need to  
tell people (i.e. namespace document authors) a better way to  
determine what the nature of a resource ought be.


Received on Wednesday, 18 January 2006 00:07:32 UTC