Talk:Mapping to RDF Graphs

From OWL
Jump to: navigation, search

Suggestion: replace center alignment with left alignment in tables RinkeHoekstra 01:19, 7 November 2007 (EST)

Moved to Document Production RinkeHoekstra 04:30, 7 November 2007 (EST)

Transformation to Triples

Table 2 translates only the URI's of entities such as Datatype, OWLClass, ObjectProperty etc. but not the entities themselves; e.g.
is mapped onto
owlClassURI rdf:type owl:Class

However, the Syntax document does introduce these elements as part of the syntax.

Is it not more appropriate to map for instance
OWLClass ( owlClassURI )
owlClassURI rdf:type owl:Class

I am aware this is not a small change, as the Syntax document will need to be revised, and perhaps it is not necessary. Perhaps, even, it would be enough to include a mapping from a.o. OWLClass statements to rdf:type owl:Class statements in Table 2

Nonetheless, it is not very 'clean' if the Functional Syntax way of stating that some element is an OWLClass differs from the way in which the RDF Mapping does the same.


In many places there is no progression through entities. Instead, for example, there is

description := owlClassURI | ... 

so it is necessary to have the mappings that are there.

That said, it does appear that there is a bug in the translation, as there is no translation for, e.g., OWLCLASS(x), which does need a mapping because the mapping is used in annotations. Strangely enough, declarations are treated correctly. I believe that the translation should be extended to have all these entities map as per their enclosed URI.

Peter Patel-Schneider 05:24, 7 November 2007 (EST)