[tdwg-tapir] Output model definition and mixed name spaces.

Roger Hyam rogerhyam at googlemail.com
Mon Jan 2 13:02:02 CET 2006


Yes, this is what I am thinking for the architecture. We need to trade 
validation for semantics. The validation moves more to the application 
layer than the transfer format - which I don't have a problem with but 
which is a change in mindset - but these are architecture issues - more 

What I was more worried about from the Tapir perspective is how we 
define output models with multiple namespaces. Whether or not we 
actually validate the response we need to be able to define the model. 
Does the protocol allow us to ask for data back in arbitrary XML 
structures (including different namespaces and so potentially RDF/XML 
serializations) or are we restricting it to a single namespace in 
initial implementations.


Donald Hobern wrote:
> Roger,
> I'm only just catching up with some of this myself, but I believe that you
> really need RDF Schema or OWL to define the constraints on semantically
> acceptable documents.  Plain RDF and XML Schema will only allow you to
> constrain this kind of document to what is syntactically valid for RDF.
> Donald
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> Donald Hobern (dhobern at gbif.org)
> Programme Officer for Data Access and Database Interoperability 
> Global Biodiversity Information Facility Secretariat 
> Universitetsparken 15, DK-2100 Copenhagen, Denmark
> Tel: +45-35321483   Mobile: +45-28751483   Fax: +45-35321480
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tdwg-tapir-bounces at lists.tdwg.org
> [mailto:tdwg-tapir-bounces at lists.tdwg.org] On Behalf Of Roger Hyam
> Sent: 30 December 2005 11:52
> To: tdwg-tapir at lists.tdwg.org
> Subject: [tdwg-tapir] Output model definition and mixed name spaces.
> Hi Everyone,
> In the few days between Christmas and New Year I am doing some thinking 
> about architecture and the general problem of validating (controlling) 
> data alongside using a more RDF based approach. This is an open world / 
> closed world problem really but relates to Tapir as follows. Suppose I 
> want to specify an output model like this:
> <?xml version="1.0"?>
> <rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf = "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
>          xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
>          xmlns:rdfs="http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#"
>          xmlns:vCard = "http://www.w3.org/2001/vcard-rdf/3.0#">
> <rdf:Description> 
> <dc:creator>              
>  <rdf:Description rdf:about = "http://qqqfoo.com/staff/corky" >
>   <rdfs:label> Corky Crystal </rdfs:label>
>   <vCard:FN> Corky Crystal </vCard:FN>
>   <vCard:N rdf:parseType="Resource">
>     <vCard:Family> Crystal </vCard:Family>
>     <vCard:Given>  Corky </vCard:Given>
>     <vCard:Other>  Jacky </vCard:Other>
>     <vCard:Prefix> Dr </vCard:Prefix>
>   </vCard:N>
>   <vCard:BDAY> 1980-01-01 </vCard:BDAY>
>  </rdf:Description>
> </dc:creator>
> </rdf:Description> 
> </rdf:RDF>
> This is taken from: http://dublincore.org/documents/dcq-rdf-xml/#sec3 
> and is a good example or using a mix of 'other' vocabularies to describe 
> something. DublinCore and vCard are pretty standard and should really 
> not be re-invented.
> I can't see how to define this structure in a simple XML Schema. It only 
> allows a single target namespace so one needs to have at least 4 XSD 
> documents (1 + 3 imported) to define this tightly. Here is an example of 
> how to do this kind of thing:
> http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/xml/library/x-tipschnm.html
> We have the additional problem that there aren't actual public XML 
> Schema definitions of these things so one would have to make up schemas 
> defining the elements used. It all gets quite horrible.
> Does the subset of XML Schema in Tapir support imports?
> Tapir has the intention of combining separate 'concepts' (which implies 
> different namespaces) into a single output model but do the concepts all 
> have to be mapped into a single namespace to make the thing workable?
> I may be missing something obvious with XML Schema or Tapir (or both) in 
> which case I would be grateful if some one could set me right. I will 
> blame it all on an excess of rich food and red wine over the past few days.
> Many thanks for your thoughts.
> Happy New Year,
> Roger


 Roger Hyam
 Technical Architect
 Taxonomic Databases Working Group
 roger at tdwg.org
 +44 1578 722782

More information about the tdwg-tag mailing list