- 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