- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: 02 May 2002 13:53:20 -0500
- To: Ziv Hellman <ziv@unicorn.com>
- Cc: www-webont-wg@w3.org
On Thu, 2002-05-02 at 12:46, Ziv Hellman wrote:
> I was recently looking through some DAML+OIL documentation and I noticed
> that in order to, for example, constrain the property 'age' of a class
> Adult to being 17 or over, one needs the following syntax.
>
> <daml:Class rdf:ID="Adult">
> <daml:intersectionOf rdf:parseType="daml:collection">
> <daml:Class rdf:about="#Person"/>
> <daml:Restriction>
> <daml:onProperty rdf:resource="#age"/>
> <daml:hasClass
>
> rdf:resource="http://www.daml.org/2001/03/daml+oil-ex-dt#over17"/>
> </daml:Restriction>
> </daml:intersectionOf>
> </daml:Class>
>
> <xsd:simpleType name="over17">
> <!-- over17 is an XMLS datatype based on decimal -->
> <!-- with the added restriction that values must be >= 17 -->
> <xsd:restriction base="xsd:decimal">
> <xsd:minInclusive value="17"/>
> </xsd:restriction>
> </xsd:simpleType>
In the course of the design of DAML+OIL, I suggested incorporating
XML Schema datatype facets into RDF/DAML+OIL; it might look
like this...
<rdf:RDF
xmlns:dt="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#"
xmlns:ex="http://example/vocab#"
xmlns:ont="http://www.daml.org/2001/03/daml+oil#"
xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
xmlns:rdfs="http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#">
<rdfs:Class rdf:about="http://example/vocab#Adult">
<ont:intersectionOf rdf:parseType="ont:collection">
<rdfs:Class rdf:about="http://example/vocab#Person"/>
<ont:Restriction>
<ont:hasClass rdf:parseType="Resource">
<ont:intersectionOf rdf:parseType="ont:collection">
<rdfs:Class
rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#decimal"/>
<rdfs:Class>
<dt:minInclusive>17</dt:minInclusive>
</rdfs:Class>
</ont:intersectionOf>
</ont:hasClass>
<ont:onProperty rdf:resource="http://example/vocab#age"/>
</ont:Restriction>
</ont:intersectionOf>
</rdfs:Class>
</rdf:RDF>
or something like that.
But the group decided to keep the datatypes and the rest of the universe
of discourse separate, and this was one of the related consequences.
I have raised the issue of splitting datatypes out...
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/webont-issues.html#5.1-Uniform-treatment-of-literal/data-values
But maybe this is worth a separate issue.
In the RDF Core WG's discussions about datatypes, I recently
suggested we include facets in the design...
# user-defined datatype (facet) support needed?
Dan Connolly (Tue, Apr 30 2002)
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002Apr/0547.html
[...]
> Will OWL inherit this type of behaviout from DAML+OIL?
Unless somebody raises an issue and we decide to resolve
the issue by changing it, yes.
--
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Thursday, 2 May 2002 14:54:00 UTC