W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lod@w3.org > February 2011

Re: Proposal to assess the quality of Linked Data sources

From: Bob Ferris <zazi@elbklang.net>
Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2011 00:00:31 +0100
Message-ID: <4D68348F.6000101@elbklang.net>
To: public-lod@w3.org
Hi Annika,

Am 25.02.2011 23:19, schrieb Annika Flemming:
>> - "no redefinition of existing vocabularies" - sometimes it necessary
>> e.g., to achieve an OWL DL compiliance of an utilized vocabulary that
>> doesn't fulfil this requirement originally
> Oh ok, I didn't know that, thanks!

See e.g. a related discussion on SemanticOverflow [1]

>>
>> - any reason for being sometimes quite strict re. the selected
>> relations for specific indicators (e.g. 4.1) i.e., SIOC is for online
>> communities and hence rather specific for that domain
> First, I wanted to leave things like the interpretation of an
> "established vocabulary" open to the reader. But as it is a diploma
> thesis, I was asked to make clear definitions for the indicators which
> wouldn't leave much room for interpretation.

Okay. Then it might be good to propose recommendations as you already 
did it for some issues.

Cheers,


Bob


[1] 
http://www.semanticoverflow.com/questions/1105/owl-dl-compliance-why-redefining-existing-concepts-propeties-in-own-ontology
Received on Friday, 25 February 2011 23:01:09 UTC

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