- From: William Waites <william.waites@okfn.org>
- Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2010 11:21:55 +0100
- To: Todd Vincent <Todd.Vincent@xmllegal.org>
- CC: Patrick Logan <patrickdlogan@gmail.com>, Mike Norton <xsideofparadise@yahoo.com>, "public-egov-ig@w3.org" <public-egov-ig@w3.org>, Dave Reynolds <dave.e.reynolds@googlemail.com>, Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>, "Emmanouil Batsis (Manos)" <manos@abiss.gr>
On 10-06-08 04:27, Todd Vincent wrote: > > By adding "OrganizationType" to the Organization data model, you provide > the ability to modify the type of organization and can then represent > both (legal) entities and (legally unrecognized) organizations. :foo rdf:type SomeKindOfOrganisation . vs. :foo org:organisationType SomeKindOfOrganisation . I don't really see the need for an extra predicate with almost identical semantics to rdf:type. There is nothing stopping a subject from having more than one type. Having a special predicate doesn't really help with modification, you could easily do the same thing with rdf:type and still run up against the problem that there is no good way of specifying *when* a particular statement is true (OPMV notwithstanding) Cheers, -w -- William Waites <william.waites@okfn.org> Mob: +44 789 798 9965 Open Knowledge Foundation Fax: +44 131 464 4948 Edinburgh, UK
Received on Tuesday, 8 June 2010 10:23:24 UTC