- From: Timothy Lebo <lebot@rpi.edu>
- Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2011 10:31:10 -0500
- To: Paolo Missier <Paolo.Missier@ncl.ac.uk>
- Cc: public-prov-wg@w3.org
Thanks, Paolo. I closed the issue. -Tim On Nov 7, 2011, at 3:28 AM, Paolo Missier wrote: > Tim > > that is indeed the expected mapping to RDFS, however I am not sure such language-specific mapping should be mentioned/ recommended in PROV-DM? > > Thanks, -Paolo > > On 11/6/11 1:32 AM, Provenance Working Group Issue Tracker wrote: >> PROV-ISSUE-144 (Tlebo): how is "reserved attribute 'type'" related to rdf:type? [Data Model] >> >> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/track/issues/144 >> >> Raised by: Timothy Lebo >> On product: Data Model >> >> The reserved attribute "type" is used a few places, but with no mention to its relation to rdf:type. This becomes particularly concerning when "subtyping" is mentioned. Should we avoid reinventing the wheel? Can we say somewhere that "type" SHOULD BE considered as rdf:type, and RDFS should be used to handle subtyping semantics and inference? >> >> >> >> 6. PROV-DM Extensibility Points >> >> "Subtyping is allowed by means of the reserved attribute type." >> >> >> > > >
Received on Tuesday, 8 November 2011 15:31:59 UTC