Re: Avoiding exposed content in DAM+OIL

From: Ian Horrocks (
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 
> 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:

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


      onProperty rdf:resource="#father"

No doubt one of our RDF experts can confirm.


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