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


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   RE: [xml-dev] Data mining the semantic web? (was RE: [xml-dev] Se mantic

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]

Thanks for the clarifications, and I agree these technologies 
need to coexist.   It would seem one could start from the 
XML DTD/Schema types, get the local systems running, then 
come in later and add RDF/OWL type descriptions.  

What are the benefits of dual systems of classification?


From: jborden@attbi.com [mailto:jborden@attbi.com]

Len, I agree with what you say below.

To be clear, RDF is not _itself_ an ontology language. 
But one can develop an ontology language e.g. DAML or 
OWL which is based upon RDF, i.e. is written in RDF 
syntax (triples) and at the same time XML (as a dialect 
of RDF/XML).

At the same time, via XML datatypes, one can speak about 
(e.g. make assertions about, or classifications of) 
pieces of structured data in OWL.

In RDF you can assign a type (i.e. place into a 
classification) with an "rdf:type" arc e.g.

<http://example.org/foo> rdf:type owl:Class .

now assuming that you have an XML Schema type you might 
integrate this with OWL as such:

my:date-format rdf:type owl:DatatypeProperty .

so the idea that a fragment of XML conforms to a certain 
XML Schema _type_ is the same as saying that such a 
fragment belongs to a corresponding OWL _Class_.

So in summary, you might assign free-form 
RDF 'individuals' to classes, and you might also assign 
fragments of markup to classes, both using OWL (which is 
the successor to DAML).

Both RDF and XML approaches to 
classifications/ontologies need to coexist on the 
semantic web.


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

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