W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-bpmlod@w3.org > October 2015

SV: Questions about TBX to RDF handling

From: Peter Svanberg <Peter.Svanberg@tnc.se>
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2015 12:47:47 +0000
To: John McCrae <john@mccr.ae>
CC: "public-bpmlod@w3.org" <public-bpmlod@w3.org>
Message-ID: <F5DAB3584096E34793A340D112D636BEC82EFF@SRV-EXMBX04.d01.local>
Thanks! Hence, either

<tbx:definition rdf:datatype="…#XMLLiteral">XML with “<” changed to  “&lt;” etc.</tbx:definition>


<tbx:definition rdf:parseType="Literal">XML as is</tbx:definition>

– correct?

Extra question 1: How should these best practice reports be interpreted? As (a) “Please do it this way, try to use our tbx vocabulary/ontology …” or (b) “Here is some tips on how it could be done, but adjust to your needs and context.”?

Extra question 2: In your file tbx.owl you define both a skos/core#TerminologicalConcept (not present in the SKOS spec.) and (it’s subclass) tbx.owl#TerminologicalConcept, how come?

/Peter Svanberg

Från: johnmccrae@gmail.com [mailto:johnmccrae@gmail.com] För John McCrae
Skickat: den 1 oktober 2015 12:25
Till: Peter Svanberg
Kopia: public-bpmlod@w3.org
Ämne: Re: Questions about TBX to RDF handling


Both are correct and equivalent.

Received on Friday, 2 October 2015 12:48:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 2 October 2015 12:48:21 UTC