Chavdar, try pasting your data here and validating: https://www.w3.org/RDF/Validator/
<cims:isFixed rdfs:Literal="XYZ" /> is valid RDF/XML syntax, but it treats rdfs:Literal as a property. Which is most likely not what you are looking for. As you can see, it generates an additional triple with a blank node subject. The blank node has no URI, it has an auto-generated unique ID instead. That is probably what you're seeing in Jena as well. But maybe others can confirm. What is the "XYZ" value supposed to be in your data? A typed literal? On Sat, Nov 2, 2019 at 3:10 PM Dr. Chavdar Ivanov <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hello > > Here the material > If in the data I have this "<cims:isFixed rdfs:Literal="XYZ" />" then the > issue appears. If I change the data to > "<cims:isFixed rdf:resource="XYZ" />" it works, meaning I do not see the > GUIDs in the ModelCom > It also works if my data is <cims:isFixed rdf:parseType="Literal">XYZ > </cims:isFixed> > Then in ModelCom I get: ....@cims:isFixed "XYZ > "^^http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#XMLLiteral... > > But it does not work if the data is > "<cims:isFixed rdfs:Literal="XYZ" />" > or > "<cims:isFixed rdfs:resource="XYZ" />" > Or > "<cims:isFixed rdf:literal="XYZ" />" > Or > "<cims:isFixed rdf:PlainLiteral="XYZ" />" > Or > "<cims:isFixed rdf:XMLLiteral="XYZ" />" > > > rdfs:Literal seems explained/defined here: > https://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-schema/#ch_literal but maybe the usage is different > > The code is > > Model model = ModelFactory.createDefaultModel(); > RDFDataMgr.read(model, new FileInputStream("here the file"), Lang.RDFXML); > for (ResIterator i = model.listSubjects(); i.hasNext(); ) { > Resource resItem = i.next(); > try { > String rdfTypeInit = > resItem.getRequiredProperty(RDF.type).getObject().toString(); > System.out.println(rdfTypeInit); > }catch (Exception e) { > e.printStackTrace(); > } > } > > The data is > > <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> > <rdf:RDF xmlns:cims="http://iec.ch/TC57/1999/rdf-schema-extensions-19990926#"; > xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"; > xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#"; > xmlns:cim="http://iec.ch/TC57/CIM100#"; > xmlns:rdfs="http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#"; > xml:base="http://iec.ch/TC57/CIM100"; > > <rdf:Description rdf:about="#Breaker.OperatedBy"> > <rdfs:label xml:lang="en">OperatedBy</rdfs:label> > <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#Breaker" /> > <rdfs:range rdf:resource="#ProtectionEquipment" /> > <cims:inverseRoleName rdf:resource="#ProtectionEquipment.Operates" /> > <cims:multiplicity > rdf:resource="http://www.cim-logic.com/schema/990530#M:0..n"; /> > <rdfs:comment>"Circuit breakers may be operated by > protection relays."</rdfs:comment> > <cims:isFixed rdfs:Literal="XYZ" /> > <rdf:type > rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property"/> > </rdf:Description> > <rdf:Description rdf:about="#Breaker.OperatedBy"> > <rdfs:label xml:lang="en">OperatedBy</rdfs:label> > <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#Breaker" /> > <rdfs:range rdf:resource="#ProtectionEquipment" /> > <cims:inverseRoleName rdf:resource="#ProtectionEquipment.Operates" /> > <cims:multiplicity > rdf:resource="http://www.cim-logic.com/schema/990530#M:0..n"; /> > <rdfs:comment>"Circuit breakers may be operated by > protection relays."</rdfs:comment> > <rdf:type > rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property"/> > </rdf:Description> > </rdf:RDF> > > -----Original Message----- > From: Martynas Jusevičius <[email protected]> > Sent: Saturday, November 2, 2019 8:17 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Possible bug in RDFDataMgr > > Chavdar, > > you should provide a sample of your RDF/XML data. > > I don’t think rdfs:Literal attribute is a part of RDF/XML spec. You should > provide the literal value simply as text content within the element. > > Looks like Jena generates a (blank node?) value instead of the missing one, > which might be a bug. > > On Sat, 2 Nov 2019 at 07.48, Dr. Chavdar Ivanov <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > I hit to something strange and I wonder if this is some bug to be fixed. > > > > > > > > If I read the attached rdf which now has only 2 elements which are the > > same with the only difference that one has “cims:isFixed”. > > > > > > > > Below I pasted what I am getting in ModelCom. There are some GUIDs > > appearing and > > > > The iteration of > > model.listSubjects().next().getRequiredProperty(RDF.*type*) fails as > > > > org.apache.jena.shared.PropertyNotFoundException: > > http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type > > > > > > > > > > > > If it really a bug and how this could be fixed? > > > > It seems it does not related to cims: as there are other cims and it is all > > fine with them. > > > > <cims:isFixed rdfs:Literal="XYZ" /> > > > > It seems that rdfs:Literal is not treated. > > > > > > > > Regards > > > > Chavdar > > > > > > > > > > > > The ModelCom is in case there is isFixed in the rdf > > > > > > > > <ModelCom {63ded209-84f9-44cf-a61e-7d7ce8b22630 @rdfs:Literal "XYZ"; > > cim:Breaker.OperatedBy @rdf:type rdf:Property; cim:Breaker.OperatedBy > > @cims:isFixed *63ded209-84f9-44cf-a61e-7d7ce8b22630*; > > cim:Breaker.OperatedBy @rdfs:comment "\"Circuit breakers may be > > operated by > > > > protection relays.\""; cim:Breaker.OperatedBy > > @cims:multiplicity http://www.cim-logic.com/schema/990530#M:0..n; > > cim:Breaker.OperatedBy @cims:inverseRoleName > > cim:ProtectionEquipment.Operates; cim:Breaker.OperatedBy @rdfs:range > > cim:ProtectionEquipment; cim:Breaker.OperatedBy @rdfs:domain > > cim:Breaker; cim:Breaker.OperatedBy @rdfs:label "OperatedBy"@en} | > > [*63ded209-84f9-44cf-a61e-7d7ce8b22630*, > > http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#Literal, "XYZ"] [ > > http://iec.ch/TC57/CIM100#Breaker.OperatedBy, > > http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type, > > http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property] [ > > http://iec.ch/TC57/CIM100#Breaker.OperatedBy, > > http://iec.ch/TC57/1999/rdf-schema-extensions-19990926#isFixed, > > 63ded209-84f9-44cf-a61e-7d7ce8b22630] [ > > http://iec.ch/TC57/CIM100#Breaker.OperatedBy, > > http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#comment, "\"Circuit breakers may > > be operated by > > > > protection relays.\""] [ > > http://iec.ch/TC57/CIM100#Breaker.OperatedBy, > > http://iec.ch/TC57/1999/rdf-schema-extensions-19990926#multiplicity, > > http://www.cim-logic.com/schema/990530#M:0..n] [ > > http://iec.ch/TC57/CIM100#Breaker.OperatedBy, > > http://iec.ch/TC57/1999/rdf-schema-extensions-19990926#inverseRoleName > > , http://iec.ch/TC57/CIM100#ProtectionEquipment.Operates] [ > > http://iec.ch/TC57/CIM100#Breaker.OperatedBy, > > http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#range, > > http://iec.ch/TC57/CIM100#ProtectionEquipment] [ > > http://iec.ch/TC57/CIM100#Breaker.OperatedBy, > > http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#domain, > > http://iec.ch/TC57/CIM100#Breaker] [ > > http://iec.ch/TC57/CIM100#Breaker.OperatedBy, > > http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label, "OperatedBy"@en]> > > > > > > > > > > > > If I delete the isFixed the result is > > > > <ModelCom {cim:Breaker.OperatedBy @rdf:type rdf:Property; > > cim:Breaker.OperatedBy @rdfs:comment "\"Circuit breakers may be > > operated by > > > > protection relays.\""; cim:Breaker.OperatedBy > > @cims:multiplicity http://www.cim-logic.com/schema/990530#M:0..n; > > cim:Breaker.OperatedBy @cims:inverseRoleName > > cim:ProtectionEquipment.Operates; cim:Breaker.OperatedBy @rdfs:range > > cim:ProtectionEquipment; cim:Breaker.OperatedBy @rdfs:domain > > cim:Breaker; cim:Breaker.OperatedBy @rdfs:label "OperatedBy"@en} | [ > > http://iec.ch/TC57/CIM100#Breaker.OperatedBy, > > http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type, > > http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property] [ > > http://iec.ch/TC57/CIM100#Breaker.OperatedBy, > > http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#comment, "\"Circuit breakers may > > be operated by > > > > protection relays.\""] [ > > http://iec.ch/TC57/CIM100#Breaker.OperatedBy, > > http://iec.ch/TC57/1999/rdf-schema-extensions-19990926#multiplicity, > > http://www.cim-logic.com/schema/990530#M:0..n] [ > > http://iec.ch/TC57/CIM100#Breaker.OperatedBy, > > http://iec.ch/TC57/1999/rdf-schema-extensions-19990926#inverseRoleName > > , http://iec.ch/TC57/CIM100#ProtectionEquipment.Operates] [ > > http://iec.ch/TC57/CIM100#Breaker.OperatedBy, > > http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#range, > > http://iec.ch/TC57/CIM100#ProtectionEquipment] [ > > http://iec.ch/TC57/CIM100#Breaker.OperatedBy, > > http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#domain, > > http://iec.ch/TC57/CIM100#Breaker] [ > > http://iec.ch/TC57/CIM100#Breaker.OperatedBy, > > http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label, "OperatedBy"@en]> > >
