Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Jonathan, Jonathan Borden wrote: > > Uche, > > > > > Hmm. I'm not sure I buy this. I see RDF Schemas as no more than an arc > > constraint mechanism. > > As DTDs and XML Schemata provide syntactic constraints, RDF Schemata provide > semantic constraints (which for the purposes of this discussion is defined > as placing constrainsts on arcs and nodes in a directed graph). So it is > true that RDF Schema provides no more than a constraint mechanism, but I > offer that this is precisely how ontologies are built. Even if sometimes I'd wish they are only this, I think that it's quite limitative to restrict schemata (either syntaxic or semantic) to a set of constraints. Even though validation is their number 1 usage, they convey more information than being a set of rules to the point of becoming intrusive when the applications rely on instance and schema merged infosets. This is a point that I find worrying, since this move toward using schemata for what they are (schemas) that can lead to locking applications to specific schema technologies is happening while the number of alternatives is increasing... Eric -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Eric van der Vlist Dyomedea http://dyomedea.com http://xmlfr.org http://4xt.org http://ducotede.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
