W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-wg@w3.org > November 2007

Re: ISSUE-65 (excess vocab): REPORTED: excessive duplication of vocabulary

From: <ewallace@cme.nist.gov>
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 10:28:24 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <200711271528.KAA21027@clue.mel.nist.gov>
To: ivan@w3.org
Cc: boris.motik@comlab.ox.ac.uk, public-owl-wg@w3.org


Ivan Herman wrote:
>Well... I did meet one example. DCMI (the organization behind the Dublin
>Core metadata) is having problems exactly on that. They have an abstract
>model document[1] where they speak about 'value surrogate' that can
>either be a literal or non-literal. When mapping this abstract model to
>RDF[2] they hit this problem (eg, is the value of a dcterm:subject
>property a literal or not).

I personally think that this example illustrates plain bad modelling 
practice. Can you point to some discussion of the motivations for this 
choice which might modify my view?

-Evan
Received on Tuesday, 27 November 2007 15:28:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:13:27 GMT