W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-vocabs@w3.org > December 2013

Re: Proposal for new type : Vocabulary

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2013 11:19:20 +0000
Message-ID: <CAK-qy=6-viiKbNaZcT8AcXUFsdG0B4Og0_9Ox=Tgn_P8qxE-eg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Bernard Vatant <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>
Cc: "public-vocabs@w3.org" <public-vocabs@w3.org>
On 3 December 2013 11:19, Bernard Vatant <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com> wrote:
> Dear all
>
> We're considering adding schema.org markup at lov.okfn.org, and in
> particular in vocabulary description pages, such as
> http://lov.okfn.org/dataset/lov/details/vocabulary_schema.html.
>
> We can now put each vocabulary in the broad CreativeWork type, but what
> about a more specific "Vocabulary" type, which could be used by any kind of
> reference vocabulary : glossaries, classifications, ontologies, concept
> schemes, subject headings, authorities ...
>
> An extra would be to have a "definedBy" property to link instances of the
> oncoming Topic class to an instance of Vocabulary.
>
> How does that sound?

Since this is for a rather limited / professional / expert audience
(like SKOS), how about just using owl:Ontology ?

http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/#Ontology-def

I believe all the other features of OWL are optional (i.e. don't feel
obliged, and it would be a reasonable use of the term.

Similarly http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-schema/#ch_isdefinedby was defined
for relating a term to ... where it came from.

Dan
Received on Friday, 6 December 2013 11:19:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:29:36 UTC