Re: XML presentation syntax Schema (modification in AnnotationType)

Sean,

>> This means that individuals can only be given types
>> which are named classes, rather than arbitrary class
>> descriptions. Is this right?

As far as the individuals are concerned, that's true.
The syntax actually reflects to the Abstract Syntax [1]
in particular the following portion (Section 2.2 Facts):

<individual> ::= Individual( [<individualID>] {<annotation>}
                             {type(<type>)} {<propertyValue>} )
<propertyValue> ::= value( <individualvaluedPropertyID>  <individualID> )
                  | value( <individualvaluedPropertyID>  <individual> )
                  | value( <datavaluedPropertyID>  <dataLiteral> )



>> Incidentally, the link to the zip archive of the
>> schemas in [1] is broken.

I have posted the revised version of the Schema [2],
Please take a look at the latest version.

[1]
http://www-db.research.bell-labs.com/user/pfps/owl/semantics/semantics-all.html
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2003Jan/0152.html


-Masahiro

Masahiro Hori, Ph.D.
Group Leader, Programming Models & Tools,
IBM Tokyo Research Laboratory
Tel: +81-46-215-4667 / Fax: +81-46-274-4282
Email: horim@jp.ibm.com


                                                                                                                  
                      Sean Bechhofer                                                                              
                      <seanb@cs.man.ac.        To:       www-webont-wg@w3.org                                     
                      uk>                      cc:                                                                
                      Sent by:                 Subject:  Re: XML presentation syntax Schema (modification in      
                      www-webont-wg-req         AnnotationType)                                                   
                      uest@w3.org                                                                                 
                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                  
                      2003/01/08 22:45                                                                            
                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                  





Masahiro Hori writes:

>I think it is better for the AnnotationType in
>the presentation syntax Schema [1] to be modified
>in the following manner.  This modification is not
>to change the abstract syntax, but to make the XML
>presentation syntax closer to the abstract syntax.

>If there is no problem in this presentation
>syntax change, I am going to reflect this
>modification to [1], and post before the f2f.

In the presentation syntax, IndividualType is specified as:

<xsd:complexType name="IndividualType">
  <xsd:sequence minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded">
    <xsd:choice>
      <xsd:element name="type" type="owl:ClassIDType" />
      <xsd:element name="ObjectPropertyValue"
                   type="owl:IndividualPropertyValueType" />
      <xsd:element name="DataPropertyValue"
                   type="owl:DataPropertyValueType" />
    </xsd:choice>
  </xsd:sequence>
  <xsd:attribute name="name" type="owl:IndividualName" />
</xsd:complexType>

This means that individuals can only be given types which are named
classes, rather than arbitrary class descriptions. Is this right?

Incidentally, the link to the zip archive of the schemas in [1] is broken.

Cheers,

             Sean

[1]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-webont-wg/2002Dec/att-0295/01-OWL-XML-Schemas.html



--
Sean Bechhofer
seanb@cs.man.ac.uk
http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~seanb

Received on Wednesday, 8 January 2003 14:31:00 UTC