OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   Re: The RDF model *is* part of the problem

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]
  • From: Stefan Haustein <haustein@kimo.cs.uni-dortmund.de>
  • To: Gabe Beged-Dov <begeddov@jfinity.com>
  • Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2000 13:11:31 +0100

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: 


> 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 Haustein
University of Dortmund
Computer Science VIII

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/


News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 2001 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS