Jump to:
To create an RDF/OWL vocabulary of the Echo Project's data model, for interoperability with other efforts.
I'm not much of an OWL hooter - and my RDF skills are right down there with creating QuickThread ThreadsML wish lists - but I'd love to meet yah when you get here to SF. [MarcCanter]
<rdf:RDF xmlns = "http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#" xmlns:owl = "http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#" xml:base = "http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#" xmlns:rdf = "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:rdfs= "http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#" xmlns:dc = "http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"> <owl:Ontology rdf:about=""> <owl:versionInfo>v 0.4 2003-07-09</owl:versionInfo> <dc:title>A Weblog Ontology, codename Echo</dc:title> <dc:identifier>http://www.intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/RdfOwlVocabulary </dc:identifier> </owl:Ontology> <!-- entry class --> <owl:Class rdf:ID= "entry" > <rdfs:label xml:lang="en">log entry</rdfs:label> <rdfs:subClassOf> <owl:Restriction> <owl:onProperty rdf:resource="#author"/> <owl:cardinality>1</owl:cardinality> <!--see NumberOfAuthorsDiscussion--> </owl:Restriction> </rdfs:subClassOf> <rdfs:subClassOf> <owl:Restriction> <owl:onProperty rdf:resource="#permanent-link"/> <owl:cardinality>1</owl:cardinality> <owl:Restriction> </rdfs:subClassOf> <rdfs:subClassOf> <owl:Restriction> <owl:onProperty rdf:resource="#publication-date"/> <owl:cardinality>1</owl:cardinality> </owl:Restriction> </rdfs:subClassOf> <rdfs:subClassOf> <owl:Restriction> <owl:onProperty rdf:resource="#hasContent"/> <owl:minCardinality>1</owl:minCardinality> </owl:Restriction> </rdfs:subClassOf> </owl:Class> <!-- entry properties --> <owl:ObjectProperty rdf:ID="author"> <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#entry"/> </owl:ObjectProperty> <owl:DatatypeProperty rdf:ID="permanent-link"> <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#entry"/> <rdfs:range rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#anyURI" /> </owl:DatatypeProperty> <owl:DatatypeProperty rdf:ID="publication-date"> <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#entry"/> </owl:DatatypeProperty> <owl:ObjectProperty rdf:ID="hasContent"> <rdfs:label xml:lang="en">content</rdfs:label> <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#entry"/> <rdfs:range rdf:resource="#content"/> </owl:ObjectProperty> <!-- content class --> <owl:Class rdf:ID="content"> <rdfs:label xml:lang="en">content item</rdfs:label> </owl:Class> </rdf:RDF>
(Started by [MarkCidade]) [RefactorOk]
Discussion
-
2003-07-07 Now a bit nearer to validating, though I've only very quickly checked against the Fecho data model.
-
RDF Validator - valid
-
OWL Validator - close
(copy of the above online at http://dannyayers.com/owltemp.owl)
Misc questions/responses - refactor ok.
-
Cardinality 1 for author?
-
Depends on what the current consensus is
-
Fair enough.
-
Where does "contents" come from?
-
[MarkCi, RfOk] Well, a traditional ontology-ish name would be hasContent. It's a pluralized content property that associates content elements with an entry.
-
Ok, so outside the explicit Necho structures? I'd perhaps lean towards hasContent(s) to make it a bit of a hint - no big deal though.
-
[MarkCi, RfOk] After thinking about, I figured that a singlular content would be better, since each instance of the property only refers to one content resource, regardless of how many content instances there are. But since it's an rdf:ID and content already identifies a resource, I figure hasContent will do.
-
Shouldn't permalink be a Resource?
-
I figure that it's just a URI. The entry itself is the resource that the URI refers to. [MarkCidade, RefactorOk]
-
Have to think about this some more. Feels like a loss of semantics to drop it to a literal.
-
Can the dates be Qualified DC? (or subclasses of?)
-
Maybe. I guess it depends on what the direction of the canonical XML format is headed towards.
-
Wait and see then?
-
We really need to crossref to model/syntax!
-
It can't be done with normal { { {-delimted codeblocks.
-
Ick. Of course - I forgot we weren't in html-land. Might have to conjure something extra-Wiki for the purpose.
-
Do we want to follow the Fecho XML syntax naming system, or use RDF Class (upper-case initial)/property (lower-case initial) style naming?
See also
-
Wikipedia: Ontology
It might be useful to incorporate vocab status tracking, see :