Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- domain_model [2011/03/25 21:19] – [RDF Implementation] michael
+++ domain_model [2011/03/29 22:50] (current) – [RDF Implementation] michael
@@ Line 60: / Line 60: @@
 The abstract domain model has to be expressed to elements offered by a specific data model to be useful. The following illustrates a way to annotate RDF (meta-)data with provenance annotation.
-  # Named graph: http://example.org/data/MonaLisaDescription
+  # Named graph: http://example.org/data/ML-Desc
   @prefix dct: <http://purl.org/dc/terms/> .
+  @prefix dctype: <http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/> .
-  :MonaLisa dct:format <http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage> ;
+  :MonaLisa dct:format dctype:StillImage ;
       dct:creator :LeonardoDaVinci .
-  # Named graph: http://example.org/data/MonaLisaAnnotation
+  # Named graph: http://example.org/data/ML-Anno
   @prefix dct: <http://purl.org/dc/terms/> .
-  <http://example.org/data/MonaLisaDescription> rdf:type dcam:DescriptionSet ;
+  <http://example.org/data/ML-Desc> rdf:type dcam:DescriptionSet ;
       dct:creator :BnF .
-  <http://example.org/data/MonaLisaAnnotation> rdf:type dcprov:AnnotationSet .
+  <http://example.org/data/ML-Anno> rdf:type dcprov:AnnotationSet .
+These triples describe two separate RDF graphs.
+{{:rdf-model.png|}}
+The following table shows how some of the RDF resources map to their corresponding UML classes of the domain model.
+^ RDF      ^ UML       ^
+| :MonaLisa dct:creator :LeonardoDaVinci .  | Description  |
+| <ML-Desc>  dct:creator :BnF . | Annotation |
+| <ML-Desc>    | Description Set |
+| <ML-Anno>    | Annotation Set |
+Our example consists of two statements about the resource '':MonaLisa'', one about authorship of the resource, the other about its format. The graph ''<ML-Desc>'' containing these statements forms a Description Set. Annotations about this metadata are contained in a second graph, ''<ML-Anno>'', forming an Annotation Set.
+Statements that are part of this graph are considered annotations, i.e., statements about the provenance of the //metadata// of the original resource '':MonaLisa'', not the resource itself. The statement ''<ML-Desc> dct:creator :BnF .'' would mean that the Bibliothèque nationale de France created the description of the :MonaLisa (i.e., the metadata) contained in the graph ''<ML-Desc>'' as opposed to the creation of the :MonaLisa itself.
 ====== Issues and further Ideas ======
    * Superclass of Description Set necessary? Domain/range problems in OWL, could be circumvented by property/chain inclusion?