From: Ian Horrocks ([email protected])
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:[email protected]
> (put return phone number in from/subject)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 04/02/02 EST