- From: Raphael Volz <rvo@aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de>
- Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 17:08:19 +0200
- To: "Peter Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Cc: "Webont" <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <DMECLAFLIOFJEFFIAJPCIENCCMAA.rvo@aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de>
Hi Peter - I finally had time to have a look to your XML Schema. First, I assume that all non-logical things like rdf:labels etc are left out for this first version and will be included at some later point. Regarding the definition of OntologyType: ----------------------------------------- Why do you use the plural for the elements "EquivalentClasses", "DisjointClasses","EquivalentProperties","DifferentIndividuals" ? With respect ot "EquivalentClasses" I do not understand how your example can validate against the schema. In the example you use the singular form "EquivalentClass" to declare "Student". Is the ability to specify SubClassOf and SubPropertyOf separately from the Class and Property definition directly under the ontology definition intended ? Regarding ClassAxiom: --------------------- I can't understand the last attribute in the definition of class axioms: <xsd:complexType name="ClassAxiom"> <!-- RDF description ... <xsd:attribute complete="complete" type="xsd:boolean" use="required" /> </xsd:complexType> There is no attribute "complete" in XML Schema for xsd:attribute ( see http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/REC-xmlschema-1-20010502/#element-attribute ) Regarding the definition of "SubClassOfType": --------------------------------------------- You can omit the minoccurs and maxoccurs for sub and super elements since they take the default values anyways. The same holds for SubPropertyOfType. The same holds for DataType / OnfeOf in DataRange. The same holds for Class etc. in DescriptionType. The same holds for SingleDescription. The same holds for RestrictionType. Within DataRestrictionType and IndividualRestrictionType: --------------------------------------------------------- is the ability to specify arbitrary numbers of allValuesFrom and someValueFrom (at the same time) really intended ? To me this does not make sense and should be appropriately restricted. General Remarks: ---------------- I'ld suggest that a general pattern for the definition of multiple occurences is used. Sometimes you establish cardinalities with the sequence (for example at the definition of OntologyType) and sometimes with the element itself (for example at the definition of Enumeration). Also I'ld suggest to have a general pattern for naming, which is partially there, e.g.: Ontology -> OntologyType Include -> IncludeType SubClassOf -> SubClassOfType on the other hand you use: Class -> ClassAxiom EnumeratedClass -> Enumeration ... Third the requirement of having the readability of the XML through RDF leads to quite many spare nestings which will lead to even more anonymous triples in the very end. Best regards, Raphael PS: I'll try to come up with an alternative concerning the last problem but this may take a while to get done. -- Raphael Volz Tel: 49 721 608-7363 Institut AIFB Web: http://www.aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de/WBS/rvo Uni Karlsruhe (TH) EMail: volz@aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de PGP-Key Fingerprint: C5A1 52FA D0F1 47B9 7075 1F22 F3E3 BEE2 68BB 1643
Received on Wednesday, 19 June 2002 11:09:23 UTC