<?xml version="1.0"?>
<!DOCTYPE rdf:RDF [
  <!ENTITY rdfs 'http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#'>
  <!ENTITY xsd 'http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#'>
  <!ENTITY data 'http://sswapmeet.sswap.info/data/'>
  <!ENTITY owl 'http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#'>
  <!ENTITY rdf 'http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#'>]>
<rdf:RDF
    xmlns:rdf="&rdf;"
    xmlns:owl="&owl;"
    xmlns:data="&data;"
    xmlns:xsd="&xsd;"
    xmlns:rdfs="&rdfs;">
    <owl:Ontology rdf:about="&data;owlOntology">
        <owl:imports rdf:resource="&data;owlOntology"/>
    </owl:Ontology>
    <owl:Class rdf:about="&data;Data"/>
    <owl:Class rdf:about="&data;Accessor">
        <rdfs:label rdf:datatype="&xsd;string">Accessor</rdfs:label>
        <rdfs:comment rdf:datatype="&xsd;string">Super class for resources that are helper or gateway resources to accessing data. In this simplest case, this is just indirection to another URI where the data resides; in other cases, it may entail user authentican and authorization. For example, given the relations:

MyDataFormat rdfs:subClassOf data:DataFormat
myData rdf:type MyDataFormat
myData data:hasAccessor myAccessor

Sending the URI of myData to myAccessor should act as a gateway to the data.  Alternatively, "myData" could be a blank node and indirection to the data would be via the value of data:hasAccessor.

There are no standards on how accessors allow access to the data. The simplest case is indirection where a HTTP GET on the accessor's value returns the data.  Another simple case is where the accessor is the data URI, and there is no data:hasAccessor property, or the property points back to its own subject. Accessors are free to define their mode of invocation and behavior.</rdfs:comment>
        <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="&data;Data"/>
    </owl:Class>
</rdf:RDF>

