From: Stefan Decker (stefan@db.stanford.edu)
Date: 11/21/01
Peter, thanks for your answer. I'm still not clear if I could represent an interpretation graph in RDF, given the right vocabulary. At 06:16 AM 11/21/2001, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote: >Let me try to answer the questions I think you are asking. > >Q: Your interpretations have several kinds of arcs. > >A: Not really, there are two kinds of information needed in an > interpretation, one mapping vocabulary to entities (the bold dashed arcs > in the interpretation picture) and one representing relationships > between entities (the skinny non-dashed arcs). that means two kind of relation types, "lucent:bold" and "lucent:skinny", right? Thanks, Stefan >Q: What is the relationship between your interpretations and RDF > interpretations? > >A: Our interpretations could be used as interpretations of RDF graphs. I > think that there would be no difference whatsoever between our > interpretations and the new model theory for RDF. Our interpretations > can also be used to give meaning to XML documents that are not RDF/XML > (because they violate the RDF striping requirement) and that thus cannot > be turned into RDF graphs. Our interpretations do not, however, produce > the same result for some RDF/XML documents because of what we consider > to be broken parts of the RDF/XML serialization. > > On page 13 we give a formal relationship between our interpretations and > the RDF model theory. > >Q: What other differences between XML and RDF do you capture? > >A: We allow for the relationships in the interpretation to be partially > order, thus capturing both the ordered view of the world from XML and > the unordered view from RDF. We capture the graph nature of RDF by > annointing some attributes (and one element type) as logical (as opposed > to non-logical) constants and giving these constants special meaning. > We capture XML Schema primitive datatyping by having an XML Schema > validation phase in our syntactic processing and using the result of > that processing. We capture XQuery references by handing reference > nodes. > >I hope that this answers your questions. > >peter > > > >From: Stefan Decker <stefan@db.stanford.edu> >Subject: Re: followup from telecon (integration of XML and RDF) >Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 22:38:16 -0800 > > > Peter, > > > > thanks a lot for the pointer to your WWW-paper. > > Please allow me a question: > > in figure 5 on page 12 you present an RDF graph and an interpretation > graph. > > The interpretation graph consists of nodes and arcs - as it seems, > > several kinds of arcs. > > Now it seems that I can go along, define the necessary vocabulary > > (some arc names and node types) and represent arbitrary interpretation > > graphs in RDF > > (e.g., for arbitrary XML documents (with the cited restrictions)) > > > > Is this true? > > If not, why not? > > > > Thanks and all the best, > > > > Stefan
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 04/02/02 EST