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?

Received on Tuesday, 27 November 2007 15:28:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:42:00 UTC