xml-dev - Re: The RDF model *is* part of the problem

[Stefan Haustein <haustein@kimo.cs.uni-dortmund.de>]

Gabe Beged-Dov wrote:
> 
> Are you saying that the package namespace is preferable to the class
> namespace for anchoring property names when mapping from Java to RDFS?
> E.g., if the two classes com.foo.A and com.foo.B both have a field
> named "bee", then the issue is that the bee property is overloaded
> when bound to the com.foo namespace?

Yes, that's the problem. However, there is an interesting suggestion
from Stefan Decker for a way out: 

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-interest/2000Feb/0170.html

> I also wonder about the distinction between Java interfaces and
> classes as far as serialization. Vilya has made a point of noting that
> David talked about Interfaces rather than Classes when explaining the
> mapping to RDF. If you were talking about data-centric interfaces that
> used the JavaBean naming patterns that would make sense. Still, I
> think it makes it more confusing than more straightforward examples
> that use a data-centric class directly.

I think Vilya replied in order to answer a question by
someone else asking "hm, does it make sense to
map classes to rdf? where are the methods?". 

Best regards

Stefan

-- 
Stefan Haustein
University of Dortmund
Computer Science VIII
www-ai.cs.uni-dortmund.de

***************************************************************************
This is xml-dev, the mailing list for XML developers.
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@xml.org&BODY=unsubscribe%20xml-dev
List archives are available at http://xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
***************************************************************************