W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-dxwg-wg@w3.org > December 2018

[dxwg] [profont] Are the main prof: classes are association-classes? (#638)

From: Simon Cox via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2018 02:24:28 +0000
To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <issues.opened-393287625-1545359061-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
dr-shorthair has just created a new issue for https://github.com/w3c/dxwg:

== [profont] Are the main prof: classes are association-classes? ==
I had another go at testing the profiles ontology - this time for PAV as a profile of PROV-O. 

Initially, I just followed the patterns of the other ones in the current examples graph, which used the actual URI's for the dependencies - see [example here](https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/blob/9e1c96c3772fa0803315dbeb26af7d93e8bb0278/profilesont/examples/profilesont_examples.ttl#L198). 

However, I felt uneasy about assigning a role to a resource, rather than to the association (if it is inherent in the resource it is not a role, it is a type ...). Then I recalled earlier adding the `prof:hasArtifact` property, so that the `prof:ResourceDescription` class could serve as a true association-class. So I have [revised the example](https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/blob/profiles-examples-pav-simon/profilesont/examples/profilesont_examples.ttl#L198) with the `prof:ResourceDescription` individuals now as qualified-associations, rather than the actual artefacts. 

1. Is this pattern correct? If so, most of the other examples in this graph need to be brought into line
2. The [explanation of `prof:ResourceDescriptor`](https://www.w3.org/TR/2018/WD-dx-prof-20181218/#Class:ResourceDescriptor) and `prof:hasArtifact` needs clarifying to make this more clear
3. should `prof:BaseSpecification` also follow this pattern, i.e. be a sub-class of  `prof:ResourceDescriptor` rather than of `dct:Standard`?  

Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/638 using your GitHub account
Received on Friday, 21 December 2018 02:24:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 April 2019 13:45:05 UTC