W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-vocabs@w3.org > March 2014

Re: How to avoid that collections "break" relationships

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2014 18:10:48 -0700
Message-ID: <53376F18.4050308@gmail.com>
To: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>, 'Pat Hayes' <phayes@ihmc.us>
CC: public-hydra@w3.org, public-lod@w3.org, 'W3C Web Schemas Task Force' <public-vocabs@w3.org>

On 03/29/2014 03:30 PM, Markus Lanthaler wrote:
> On Wednesday, March 26, 2014 5:26 AM, Pat Hayes wrote:
>> Hmm. I would be inclined to violate IRI opacity at this point and have
>> a convention that says that any schema.org property schema:ppp can have
>> a sister property called schema:pppList, for any character string ppp.
>> So you ought to check schema:knowsList when you are asked to look for
>> schema:knows. Then although there isn't a link in the conventional
>> sense, there is a computable route from schema:knows to
>> schema:knowsList, which as far as I am concerned amounts to a link.
> Schema.org doesn't suffer from this issue as much as other vocabularies do
> as it isn't defined with RDFS but uses its own, looser description
> mechanisms such as schema:domainIncludes and schema:rangeIncludes. So what
> I'm really looking for is a solution that would work in general, not just
> for some vocabularies.
> [...]
>
>
> --
> Markus Lanthaler
> @markuslanthaler
>
I would  like to see some firm definition of just how these looser description 
mechanisms actually work.

peter
Received on Sunday, 30 March 2014 01:11:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:29:38 UTC