+cc: Leigh, Libby On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 6:56 PM, Bernard Vatant <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>wrote: > Hello folks > > We are currently revisiting the Geonames ontology (long overdue) including > feature codes, on which I would like to add some Dublin-Core like > annotations re. concepts. In particular some concepts are going to be > deprecated using dcterms:isReplacedBy, some will be deprecated altogether > without replace because they've never be used, and quite a lot will be put > in a status of quasi-obsolescence or quasi-extinction. Those are feature > codes used less than one per million features, which means less than 7 times > considering Geonames has over 7 millions features in store ... > I was wondering which vocabulary is the best for expressing that. > http://www.w3.org/2003/06/sw-vocab-status/ns is used by FOAF, Bibontology > and others. But it defines status as a data property, I would prefer an > object property with an enumerated range of individual values. Of course I > can define those in geonames data space, but since this is not particular to > geographical codes, I was wondering if there was some vocabulary on some > shelves I miss. BTW I was amazed not to find any "status" property in Dublin > Core. > Yes, that is a limitation of the sw-vocab-status vocab. At the end of last year I started writing it up towards a W3C Note (after a 'go for it' from Ivan), with Libby Miller and Leigh Dodds. The effort is a little stalled but the draft is at http://www.w3.org/2003/06/sw-vocab-status/note.html If you think it's worthwhile, we could expand the note to include new more useful properties. Interested to help? :) (even encouraging us to put time into this counts as help!) Dan > Suggestions? > > -- > Bernard Vatant > Senior Consultant > Vocabulary & Data Engineering > Tel: +33 (0) 971 488 459 > Mail: bernard.vatant@mondeca.com > ---------------------------------------------------- > Mondeca > 3, cité Nollez 75018 Paris France > Web: http://www.mondeca.com > Blog: http://mondeca.wordpress.com > ---------------------------------------------------- >
Received on Tuesday, 27 April 2010 18:48:21 UTC