<?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;Validator">
        <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="&data;Data"/>
        <rdfs:comment rdf:datatype="&xsd;string">Super class for resources that can validate data; for example, given the relations:

MyDataFormat rdfs:subClassOf data:DataFormat
myData rdf:type MyDataFormat
myData data:hasValidator myValidator

Sending the URI of myData to myValidator should check the data for compliance against the type MyDataFormat.

There are no standards on how validators signal valid or invalid data. 
Validators are free to define their mode of invocation and behavior.</rdfs:comment>
        <rdfs:label rdf:datatype="&xsd;string">Validator</rdfs:label>
    </owl:Class>
</rdf:RDF>

