Re: Eurocentrism, incorrect unit abbreviations, and proprietary Royalist Engish (sic) terms

Hi all:
If anyone wants to create translations or language variants for specific geographic variants of English, this can be done easily by publishing a complementing RDF resource that provides alternative labels and descriptions with a respective RDF language tag. For the language tag, any ISO 639 code will do, and there are respective codes for almost any living or dead language or dialect (like Bavarian German).

But as Thad said, we try to avoid changing the local part of the URI of concepts, because it is essentially just a unique identifier, not a word, and any change has a lot of side-effects on existining data and tools.

Best wishes
Martin Hepp


-----------------------------------
martin hepp  http://www.heppnetz.de
mhepp@computer.org          @mfhepp




> On 11 Jul 2018, at 04:05, Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Oops, forgot to answer your last question.
> 
> No.
> We can't have parallel terms.  a spot of fire to gather around is a spot of fire to gather around.
> We cannot have a Campsite Type and also have CampingPitch Type, since they equate to the same exact concept.  And we already agreed they are the same thing, just different terms used in different cultures.
> We don't duplicate exact concepts that have different terms in different cultures.
> We tell folks that they can say that concepts are the same as other concepts through the use of http://www.schema.org/sameAs property and a few other ways, like duplicating "name": or "description" to give a term its many names it is known by or multiple descriptions. I.E., you can repeat properties to your hearts desire with Schema.org
> 
> -Thad
> 

Received on Wednesday, 11 July 2018 16:04:29 UTC