W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lod@w3.org > July 2010

Re: The Counter Ontology

From: Bob Ferris <zazi@elbklang.net>
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2010 14:56:05 +0200
Message-ID: <4C459CE5.5090005@elbklang.net>
To: Vasiliy Faronov <vfaronov@gmail.com>
CC: music-ontology-specification-group@googlegroups.com, Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>
Hi Vasiliy,


Am 20.07.2010 14:39, schrieb Vasiliy Faronov:
> Bob Ferris wrote:
>> The second property of co:Counter is co:count, which is a simple
>> xsd:int based datatype property.
>
> Any reasons for not using rdf:value[1]?
>
> Not that it would make a lot of difference, but seems like this property
> was made exactly for such statements.
>

Good question, however, when I read through the description of 
rdf:value[1], I found also:

"..the principle that such simple values are often insufficient to 
adequately describe these values is an important one. In a global 
environment such as the Web, it is generally not safe to make the 
assumption that anyone accessing a property value will understand the 
units being used.."

How can I make sure that the value of my counter concept is of the type 
xsd:Integer? I think with the current definition:

co:count
       rdf:type rdf:Property , owl:FunctionalProperty ;
       rdfs:comment "Links a counter resource to the actual count"@en ;
       rdfs:domain co:Counter ;
       rdfs:isDefinedBy co: ;
       rdfs:label "has count"@en ;
       rdfs:range xsd:integer ;
       vs:term_status "stable"@en .

it works.

Cheers,


Bob

> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-primer/#rdfvalue
Received on Tuesday, 20 July 2010 12:56:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Sunday, 31 March 2013 14:24:28 UTC