[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
I'm not sure it is that straightforward. It's awfully handy to be able
to use XSD types to constrain RDF values; otherwise, one might end up
doing something like defining properties to describe the types that
apply to an RDFS class instance- now that would be REALLY ugly. XSD
does have a role to play in describing RDF docs from a syntactic
perspective. XSD is a little overzealous in that it would also allow
you to capture limited object relations, a task better left to RDF and
its cousins (and sisters and aunts, for you G&S fans out there).
Paul Prescod wrote:
XSD is for XML in general. RDFS/OWL is for RDF in particular. I believe
that the right tool depends on the type of data you are trying to
validate. I would not usually use XSD for RDF data because it isn't
really optimized for data using RDF's conventions. Further: if you are
in the RDF world then your software works with RDF triples, not syntax,
so what does it care whether the syntax meets some pattern or another.
If it doesn't care, why express restrictions on that syntax?
And of course it is not directly feasible to apply RDFS/OWL to XML data
that does not use those conventions.
But if you really do want to combine two (or more) schema languages,
RELAX NG sticks more closely to a "pure syntax" view of XML validation
than does XSD. So the boundary would be clearer. This might be useful if
you had two different classes of software looking at the same data, some
looking at the syntax and some working with the RDF triples.
Paul Prescod
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>
|
