anyType?

21 views
Skip to first unread message

Bohms, H.M. (Michel)

unread,
Jul 30, 2019, 11:19:31 AM7/30/19
to topbrai...@googlegroups.com

 

 

Isn’t there xsd:anyType in RDF since it is the default when not specifying a range?

(just checking)

 

Thx Michel

 

 

 

Dr. ir. H.M. (Michel) Böhms
Senior Data Scientist

T +31888663107
M +31630381220
E michel...@tno.nl

Location

 

This message may contain information that is not intended for you. If you are not the addressee or if this message was sent to you by mistake, you are requested to inform the sender and delete the message. TNO accepts no liability for the content of this e-mail, for the manner in which you use it and for damage of any kind resulting from the risks inherent to the electronic transmission of messages.

 

 

 

 

dprice

unread,
Jul 30, 2019, 12:13:32 PM7/30/19
to topbrai...@googlegroups.com
On 30 Jul 2019, at 16:19, 'Bohms, H.M. (Michel)' via TopBraid Suite Users <topbrai...@googlegroups.com> wrote:

 
 
Isn’t there xsd:anyType in RDF since it is the default when not specifying a range?
(just checking)

Nope. Full list at of RDF acceptable datatypes at:


Not sure where you got that idea, but it’s incorrect. If a range is not specified, it does not default to  xsd:anyType.

For OWL see:


xsd:anyType is not mentioned anywhere in these specs.

Cheers,
David

 
Thx Michel
 
 
 
Dr. ir. H.M. (Michel) Böhms
Senior Data Scientist

This message may contain information that is not intended for you. If you are not the addressee or if this message was sent to you by mistake, you are requested to inform the sender and delete the message. TNO accepts no liability for the content of this e-mail, for the manner in which you use it and for damage of any kind resulting from the risks inherent to the electronic transmission of messages.
 
 
 
 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TopBraid Suite Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to topbraid-user...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/topbraid-users/cc4d4f0f383e4305a0c2ef67725bed31%40tno.nl.


Bohms, H.M. (Michel)

unread,
Jul 30, 2019, 5:59:43 PM7/30/19
to topbrai...@googlegroups.com
Hi david where or better how i got the idea...

I try to find the best range for a property hasValue when modelling objectified properties.
Depending on the also now explicitly modelled datatype..the value can take in principle any value.

So i though wel maby use xsd anytype...
Then i indeed saw...not in the list...so i thought...well maybe not in the list because of same effect of modelling no range at all...

Just to explain my thinking...

Anyway...in the end...better leave the range open in this situation?

Ps for similar objectified relationships i need hasReference...and this time i can use xsd anyuri.....

Gr michel

Op 30 jul. 2019 18:13 schreef dprice <dpr...@topquadrant.com>:

Irene Polikoff

unread,
Jul 30, 2019, 6:42:40 PM7/30/19
to topbrai...@googlegroups.com
Depends on what you are trying to accomplish.

If there is no constraint on the kind of values a property may have, then do not say anything.

If you know that values can be either URIs or blank nodes, then use sh:nodeKind constraint with sh:BlankNodeOrIRI.

If values will always be URIs, then use sh:nodeKind constraint with sh:IRI.

If you are using rtfs:range and values can be either URIs or blank nodes or just URIs, then use rdfs:Resource as the range. Of course, RDFS is not about constraints or data validity, but about inferences.
> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/topbraid-users/8db7d4bd-6143-4604-9101-9c7a0d2cd5bb%40email.android.com.

Bohms, H.M. (Michel)

unread,
Jul 31, 2019, 1:47:06 AM7/31/19
to topbrai...@googlegroups.com
In my case uris are seperate.
So its about all values not being an uri...so the most generic datatype.
So value can be float...decimal...boolean...string
Ps for now in rdfs/owl...so yes inferencing...but for some closed world interpret...other issue....

Guess still conclusion...not specify a range for the valueOf property of the objectified datatypeproperty...

Will also check how schema:value ir even owl:value do this....


Op 31 jul. 2019 00:42 schreef Irene Polikoff <ir...@topquadrant.com>:

Holger Knublauch

unread,
Jul 31, 2019, 2:07:26 AM7/31/19
to topbrai...@googlegroups.com

Why don't you just declare it owl:DatatypeProperty and without any range or owl:allValuesFrom?

Holger

Bohms, H.M. (Michel)

unread,
Jul 31, 2019, 3:08:03 AM7/31/19
to topbrai...@googlegroups.com

 

 

Why don't you just declare it owl:DatatypeProperty

> that is what I do now

without any range or owl:allValuesFrom?

> that is indeed what I wanted to check below

> I now also looked into owl:hasValue

> is this one only to be used for use in a constraint or could it be used as alternative for my own “: hasValue”

(if so, I can also use it for objectified relationships since its range is indeed rdfs:Resource so also covering uris)

> or if misuse....better use rdf:value (from resource to resource) which intention is however for “structured values” ....?

>yet another alt. is: https://schema.org/value (but not for uris/objectproperties)

Thx michel

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages