- From: kcoyle via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 03 Sep 2018 17:15:11 +0000
- To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
@nicholascar I agree totally with the relaxation of ranges - my comments here were instead about the depiction of properties in the UML diagrams as properties of a class when in fact they are not properties of the class. There's a gap between the RDF for DCAT in the depiction given here, and I'm wondering if there is any suggestion for how to close that gap, or if it is considered unnecessary. My own approach is that the gap would be closed by a profile that contains constraints that are not available in RDF.* This is a bit frightening because it means that even DCAT is a profile. In fact, DCAT could be a profile under the DCMI definition. *(We know that OWL 2 has attempted some of this, but the axiomatic basic for OWL is so complex that I fear there is almost no way to use it "correctly." Can anyone define what an OWL constraint actually constrains? I only know one person who can, and that person is not in this discussion.) -- GitHub Notification of comment by kcoyle Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/317#issuecomment-418164210 using your GitHub account
Received on Monday, 3 September 2018 17:15:12 UTC