[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Model issues was: A certain difficulty

  • From: "Tim Berners-Lee" <timbl@w...>
  • To: "David Megginson" <david@m...>, <xml-dev@x...>, <www-rdf-interest@w...>
  • Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 17:07:08 -0500

xml local id global id

-----Original Message-----
From: David Megginson <david@m...>
To: xml-dev@x... <xml-dev@x...>; www-rdf-interest@w...
<www-rdf-interest@w...>
Date: Friday, February 25, 2000 6:07 AM
Subject: Re: A certain difficulty


>Pierre-Antoine CHAMPIN writes:
>
> > I would not say that either !
> > I find the RDF model very simple and uniform (it's all about triples)
> > which makes its elegance... and for some people its weakness !
>
>Unfortunately, it's not about triples.  The only way to discover the
>true RDF data model is to reverse-engineer it from the XML, and it
>turns out that there are at least six components (not three) in each
>statement:
>
>  subject
>  subjectType (global id, local id, URI pattern)


The global ID and local ID are IDs, so the semantics should be the same.

A reference with a #fragmentID is taken as a reference to a part of  (or
view of) a document, while a reference without a # is taken as a reference
to the document.There is an unspoken problem that in the RDF spec a
reference to a subtree of an XML document containing RDF is taken to be a
erference to the RDF object.  .........(1)

The URI-pattern I agree is a big problem, and I think a lot of people would
have wished it not there. I wonder how many  systems implement it.  It seems
to me best to put it off to a level of logic above the basic RDF.
.............. (2)

>  predicate

>  object
>  objectType (literal text, literal XML markup, reference)


The object being the union of litteral types and reference to node is
reasonable: the object may be represented as a pair (type, value) for
example (or some other syntax or a pointer into a different part of memory
or a pointer to a self-typed object or whatever.)

You could argue (and people have i understand) that the same ought to hold
for the subject of course.   ............... (3)

>  objectLang


This is a mess pure and simpe: it is in the syntax and not in the model. How
did that happen? The syntax should not have bowed to the
internatoinalization community with a syntactic nod, but instead asked for
an RDF vocabulary for language. It should be removed from the synatax.
..............(4)
 My nurdlings on two ways of doing it are in
http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/InterpretationProperties


>These are not simply syntactic artifacts -- it's information that
>*must* be exposed through any RDF API, and thus, part of the core
>model, independent of the peculiarities of the XML markup (note that
>I'm assuming that bagID, etc. are predigested).  The URI patterns
>(aboutEachPrefix), especially, make it much trickier to do any
>relational database implementation of RDF, since you the set of
>possible subjects is open.


yes, abouteachprefix was a mistake in retrospect.

Here are 4 issues for an RDF M&S retrospecive post-Rec issues list!
Ralph or Dan Brickley was going to draw one up I think.

> > In the contrary, the XML syntax is a bit confuse, true.
>
>Yes, it is also unnecessarily confusing.
>
> > In my point of view, the problem comes from the recommandation
> > mixing modeling and syntaxic aspects (I won't mention semantic
> > aspects !)  in a way it's hard to differentiate them without some
> > RDF experience.
>
>The problem is that the model as presented is naively simple, and the
>WG failed to notice that the XML syntax is not based directly on that
>simple model.
>
>
>All the best,
>
>
>David
>
>--
>David Megginson                 david@m...
>           http://www.megginson.com/
>


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

PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!

Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!

Buy Stylus Studio Now

Download The World's Best XML IDE!

Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!

Don't miss another message! Subscribe to this list today.
Email
First Name
Last Name
Company
Subscribe in XML format
RSS 2.0
Atom 0.3
 

Stylus Studio has published XML-DEV in RSS and ATOM formats, enabling users to easily subcribe to the list from their preferred news reader application.


Stylus Studio Sponsored Links are added links designed to provide related and additional information to the visitors of this website. they were not included by the author in the initial post. To view the content without the Sponsor Links please click here.

Site Map | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks
Free Stylus Studio XML Training:
W3C Member
Stylus Studio® and DataDirect XQuery ™are products from DataDirect Technologies, is a registered trademark of Progress Software Corporation, in the U.S. and other countries. © 2004-2013 All Rights Reserved.