- From: aisaac via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2019 20:54:58 +0000
- To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
So we'd be pushing the complexity to creators of extension? I have no objection from Still I have doubt it will work. Extending a vocabulary by subproperties is quite hard. It will be especially awful when people would like to reconcile extensions, where rdfs:subpropertyOf (that has precise semantics) will have probably be misused to represent links that are much softer. In fact the high possibility of such misuse is probably going to cast a big doubt on any extension, even for simple re-use. If we want specializations, then we can do it also with a vocabulary of roles, with skos:broader between roles. This would allow to "search on the general property and retrieve all of the specific properties as well". Again, this is how Web Annotation Data Model has done it for its framework foir representing motivations, and I believe this as best a practice it can get. And as a final heads-up: we can't probably avoid discussing hierarchies of profile roles for our 'core'. I believe that both 'documentation' and 'guidance' (which you've rightfully put in a specialization relationship) have to be tackled (and thus, minted) by us as they correspond to core scenarios. -- GitHub Notification of comment by aisaac Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/747#issuecomment-463366205 using your GitHub account
Received on Wednesday, 13 February 2019 20:55:01 UTC