- From: Jonathan Borden <jonathan@openhealth.org>
- Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2002 22:29:23 -0500
- To: <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
I would like to propose a partial yet relatively simple and interim solution to the issue of Structured Datatypes. A full solution would involve 'grafting' the OWL class hierarchy onto the XML Schema type system i.e. an XML Schema type is considered a first class OWL class, and an OWL reasoner understands XML Schema type derivation composition etc. For the interim I propose when rdfs:range restrictions on owl:DatatypeProperty classes are URIs that identify XML datatypes (leaving alone for the moment the question about how one associates a URI with an XML datatype) that the lexical value of the owl:DatatypeProperty be an RDF datatype conforming to the syntax of rdf:XMLLiteral and that this fragment of XML be valid with respect to the particular XML datatype (e.g. XML Schema particle) For example suppose the XML Schema particle < xsd:complexType name =" xType " id="xType"> < xsd:sequence > < xsd:element name ="a" type =" xsd:int " minOccurs =" 0 " /> < xsd:element name ="b" type =" xsd:string " minOccurs =" 0 " /> </ xsd:sequence > </ xsd:complexType > then (modulo base URIs) <owl:DatatypeProperty rdf:ID="xDTprop"> <rdfs:range rdf:resource="#xType"/> </owl:DatatypeProperty> and <rdf:Description rdf:ID="foo"> <ex:xDTprop rdf:parseType="Literal"> <a>123</a> <b>asdaasd</b> </ex:xDTprop> </rdf:Description> By this mechanism fragments of XML such as "<a>1234</a><b>asdasd</b>" which are valid w.r.t the type "#xType" and are considered individuals/members of the class "#xDTprop" Jonathan
Received on Tuesday, 5 November 2002 22:48:49 UTC