[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: requirement to make name significant in key/name/value for some typesof searches
Hi all, First of all, thanx for coming to NZ to those who came and for those who didn't - we were missing you. :-) I hope you enjoyed your stay here. I would like to return to the proposal I made at the very end of the last FTF: make name significant for some searchers on keyedReference. This is required for some semantic and non-semantic searches when an OWL onlotology is used. Ontology example: <owl:Class rdf:ID="Product"/> <owl:Class rdf:ID="Price"> <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="#Product"/> </owl:Class> <owl:Class rdf:ID="DeliveryTerm"> <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="#Product"/> <owl:oneOf rdf:parseType="Collection"> <owl:Thing rdf:about="#Overnight"/> <owl:Thing rdf:about="#AirMail"/> <owl:Thing rdf:about="#UPSInternational"/> </owl:oneOf> </owl:Class> <owl:DatatypeProperty rdf:about="#dealer"> <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#Price"/> <rdf:range rdf:resource="&xsd;decimal"/> </owl:DatatypeProperty> <owl:DatatypeProperty rdf:about="#distributor"> <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#Price"/> <rdf:range rdf:resource="&xsd;decimal"/> </owl:DatatypeProperty> <owl:DatatypeProperty rdf:about="#retial"> <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#Price"/> <rdf:range rdf:resource="&xsd;decimal"/> </owl:DatatypeProperty> Ontology graph: Product - Price - dealer - distributor - retail - DeliveryTerm where dealer, distributor and retail are properties of Price with XML Schema decimal datatype and DeliveryTerm can take values from the enumeration [Overnight, AirMail, UPSInternational] only. Ontology use example as RDF/XML: <Product> <Price> <dealer rdf:datatype="&xsd;decimal">100</dealer> <distributor rdf:datatype="&xsd;decimal">50</distributor> <retail rdf:datatype="&xsd;decimal">150</retail> </Price> </Product> Ontology use example as keyedReference in a category bag: Ontology:tModel:Key #Product //the name is omited - the entity is categorised as #Product Ontology:tModel:Key #dealer 100 //dealer price is 100 Ontology:tModel:Key #distributor 50 //distributor price is 50 Ontology:tModel:Key #retail 150 //retail price is 150 _Find use case: I need to find all products with dealer price 100. I use an ontology registered as a tModel with key Ontology:tModel:Key. Parsing the ontology I understand that what I'm looking for must be categorised as #Product with a property #dealer = 100. This makes the name significant for searches. At the same time, there is no need for UDDI to understand the semantics of the search as the reasoning can be done outside of UDDI. I discussed this scenario and solution with Massimo and he agreed that it is a common scenario, but suggested a workaround that he will post to the list shortly. I think it is very important for us to include this in the spec if we use OWL for ontologies. If names a not significant, then all you can say about an individual is that it belongs to some class. E.g. one can easily state that an entity is a #Product, but there is no no simple way to state what the #DeliveryTerm is. Another fundamental reason to make name significant is the very nature of RDF - it is a triple. Subject - the entity Predicate - name Object - value and the key refers to a tModel which refers to the ontology There can be other RDF bits beyond the triple, e.g. rdf:datatype attribute, but we can do without it in the meantime. Well, I can be wrong with all this, so please, feel free to put me right. Regards, Max
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]