W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org > July 2009

Re: an alternative for microformat-like simplicity

From: Toby A Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2009 19:21:29 +0100
Message-Id: <3A388B37-9D14-4A78-A6E7-8B854074A133@g5n.co.uk>
To: RDFa list <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>
On Thu, 2009-07-16 at 10:03 -0700, Ben Adida wrote:
> Vocabulary Definition at http://ben.adida.net/vocab, using RDFa:
>
> <div about="#name" typeof="rdf:Property">
>     <h4 property="rdfs:label">name</h4>,
>     which corresponds to
>     <a rel="owl:sameAs"
>        href="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name">
>          foaf:name
>     </a>.
> </div>

I'm pretty sure that OWL people would advise you to use either
rdfs:subPropertyOf or the stronger owl:equivalentProperty rather than
owl:sameAs. This would be for two reasons:

1. OWL-DL purity: apart from in OWL Full, owl:sameAs can only be used
for instances (things) and not for properties and classes.

2. owl:sameAs asserts that everything that is true about one thing is
true about the other. I'm not sure that the rdfs:isDefinedBy property of
foaf:name necessarily applies to yourvocab:name. You don't want
something as strong as owl:sameAs here.

> - what does rel="license" resolve to when @prefix is set? I think  
> the
> reserved keywords should trump all, but it's worth a debate.
>
> - what does rel="foobar" resolve to? I think if you've declared
> @prefix, then it is no longer ignored and there should be a foobar
> property within that vocabulary, but if there isn't then it's just a
> dead triple, very little harm in that.

"me too" to both.

-- 
Toby A Inkster
<mailto:mail@tobyinkster.co.uk>
<http://tobyinkster.co.uk>
Received on Thursday, 16 July 2009 18:20:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 16 July 2009 18:20:34 GMT