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]> >
