- 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