Reputation: 26415
I just browsed this uri http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns and found this prefix declarations:
@prefix rdf: <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#> .
@prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> .
@prefix owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#> .
@prefix dc: <http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/> .
if this uri supposed to define rdf? How can we use rdfs and owl in this document if we all know that rdf is the basis of those languages?
Upvotes: 1
Views: 266
Reputation: 10659
Note that in this example RDFS and OWL are purely namespaces - there is no hierarchy of classes or properties, nor any class restrictions or other RDFS or OWL constructs.
The basic definitions are not included in actual RDFS or OWL ontologies - this is not a default top level ontology (for example, the label for rdf:type
cannot be found searching in an RDFS ontology, unless it contains explicitly these triples.
You could consider this example a metaontology - looks more like a convenient format to hold a few basic information, which could be embedded in the specs instead.
Upvotes: 3