Re: Avoiding exposed content in DAM+OIL

From: Ian Horrocks ([email protected])
Date: 12/26/00


On December 25, Frank van Harmelen writes:
> 
> Dear joint-everybody,
> 
> While working on the DAML+OIL annotated example (aka the "walkthru"), I noticed the following point. I would be interested in your opinion:
> 
> One place where DAML+OIL annotations might live is inside .html files. We would want browsers to be undisturbed by the DAML+OIL annotations (ie, display nothing of these annotations). I believe this is called "avoiding exposed content" in the RDF M&S spec. I understand that RDF was explicitly designed to make this possible (see section 7.7 of http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-rdf-syntax/). 
> 
> Our current DAML+OIL syntax does very well in this respect. Besides some semantics-less tags like <versionInfo> and <comment>, all of DAML+OIL avoids exposed contents, WITH THE SINGLE EXCEPTION OF CARDINALITY CONSTRAINTS! An expression like 
> 
>   <restrictedBy>
>     <Restriction>
>       <onProperty rdf:resource="#father"/>
>       <cardinality>1</cardinality>
>     </Restriction>
>   </restrictedBy>

Good point. There are many abbreviated forms of RDF, some of which seem
to do the trick. How about:

  <restrictedBy>
    <Restriction>
      <onProperty rdf:resource="#father"/>
      <cardinality rdfs:Literal="1">
    </Restriction>
  </restrictedBy>

or:

  <restrictedBy>
    <Restriction
      onProperty rdf:resource="#father"
      cardinality="1"/>
  </restrictedBy>

No doubt one of our RDF experts can confirm.

Ian


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 04/02/02 EST