chung wrote:
> RDF issues and proposals:
>
>
>
>       * Change all rdf:datatype= “&xsd;string” to
>   
This is generated by Protege, I guess both syntax might be equivalent.
>         rdf:datatype=”xsd:string”. Use more specific datatypes when
>         possible. For example: <dc:identifier
>         rdf:datatype=”xsd:anyURI”>http://valid/uri</dc:identifier>
>   
OK
>       * Identifiers such as xsd:nonPositiveInteger and
>         xsd:positiveInteger could be used instead of xsd:int in some
>         cases. See http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/ for reference.
>   
OK, I'll be updating opentox.owl .
>       * In Algorithm RDF representation, the element <dc:title> is
>         terminated with a </dc:date>
>   
Fixed.
>       * Don't we need some extra information in the compound rdf
>         document, such as its title which could be its IUPAC name?
>
>   
Alternative option is to consider all identifier as Features , introduce
an ontology for identifiers (e.g. CAS, Einecs, names, synonyms, etc.)
and link with owl:sameAs.  This will allow handling names and other
identifier when coming from different sources.

Best regards,
Nina
> Note: Find attached the graphs of the RDFs that Nina proposed.
>
> Best Regards
> Pantelis
>
>
>   
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Development mailing list
> Development at opentox.org
> http://www.opentox.org/mailman/listinfo/development