From: Ian Horrocks (horrocks@cs.man.ac.uk)
Date: 02/15/01
Dan, Thanks for proof reading my dodgy RDF/XML. Jim must take some of the blame as he was distracting me by giving a Presentation while I was working on it. I have fixed some of the more obvious errors: I will do a better job when I get home. I shoved everything in one file just by way of trying to keep the example simple, but that obviously isn't going to work - I will move the datatype definitions into a separate file. Regards, Ian On February 15, Dan Connolly writes: > Ian Horrocks wrote: > > > > Further to Peter's earlier email about the new proposal, I have now > > updated the web site with the new language specification, semantics > > and example files: > > > > http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~horrocks/DAML+OIL/Datatypes/ > > yes, this looks about right; by way of making the > benefit of off-the-shelf RDF tools evident, here's > a little diagram I consed up this afternoon... > > http://www.w3.org/2001/01/ctfigs/ex-ian.ps > http://www.w3.org/2001/01/ctfigs/ex-ian.dot > > generated using http://www.rdfviz.org/ from > > http://www.w3.org/2001/01/ctfigs/ex-ian.daml > > which is a cleaned up excerpt from > > [dex] > http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~horrocks/DAML+OIL/Datatypes/daml+oil+concrete-ex.daml > Thursday, 15-Feb-01 16:31:02 GMT > > some comments: > > *** I think you should have a # at the end of > xmlns:xsd ="http://www.w3.org/2000/10/XMLSchema-datatypes" > > e.g. the full name of decimal is > http://www.w3.org/2000/10/XMLSchema-datatypes#decimal > not > http://www.w3.org/2000/10/XMLSchema-datatypesdecimal > > er... actually, the namespace name should be > http://www.w3.org/2000/10/XMLSchema# > > cf. Appendix A of Part 2 of the schema spec > http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/CR-xmlschema-2-20001024/#schema > and the discussion of it > URIs for primitive datatypes and facets? > Dan Connolly (Fri, Dec 15 2000) > (esp Martin G's reply) cited from my notes on this stuff > http://www.w3.org/2001/01/ct24 > > > *** [dex] is not well-formed; > you can only have one root element in an XML document. > (yes, this sucks. yes, I'd like to change it. > No, I don't expect a revision of XML 1.0 any > time soon.) > > I'm not quite sure what you're trying to do with XML Schema > stuff and RDF stuff in the same document, but this > attempt doesn't work. > > > *** There are a few xml-level typos. I highly recommend > you use xmlwf to check things. I invoke it ala > make from emacs's meta-x compile thingy to xml-wf-check > all my XML stuff (XHTML, RDF, etc.) > > xmlwf is part of expat > http://www.jclark.com/xml/expat.html > > > ** This isn't how RDF 1.0 syntax works: > > <rdf:type rdf:resource="daml:UniqueProperty"/> > In RDF 1.0, you have to spell out daml: longhand when > you use it inside a resource attribute. > > > *** hmm... should our cardinality propoerties now > take numbers, rather than numerals, as their values? > > > > > After my recent reprimand I remembered to keep the previous version > > online: > > > > http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~horrocks/DAML+OIL/Datatypes-jan-01/ > > > > Regards, Ian > > -- > Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ > office: tel:+1-913-491-0501 > pager: mailto:connolly.pager@w3.org > (put return phone number in from/subject)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 04/02/02 EST