W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wai-ert@w3.org > April 2007

Re: comment on section 2.6.1 of EARL Schema

From: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2007 10:59:23 +0200
To: "Shadi Abou-Zahra" <shadi@w3.org>, "Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
Cc: public-wai-ert@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.trk9w9jlwxe0ny@pc052.coreteam.oslo.opera.com>

On Sat, 28 Apr 2007 12:20:32 +0200, Shadi Abou-Zahra <shadi@w3.org> wrote:

> Jeremy Carroll wrote:
>>
>> I read at
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-EARL10-Schema-20070323/#outcomevalue
>> [[
>> (or subclasses of them)
>> ]]
>> (end of first para of section)
>>
>> This does not make sense: the values are not classes.

They are defined as owl:Things - as I understood OWL, that makes them rdfs:classes, and therefore amenable to being subclassed. This was certainly the intention, to allow precisely the kind of use case you outlined (the details of the use case I had were to describe fail in terms of more or less complete failure to do something, or a partial attempt that still failed to meet the requirement).

Being able to add human-readable text is nice, but adding it as a label for a new value is much more extensibility-friendly than adding it as messages to "refine" the meaning of a standard result.

If I have misunderstood how owl:Thing works, is there a simple way to change the Schema that would achieve the goal?

cheers

Chaals

-- 
  Charles McCathieNevile, Opera Software: Standards Group
  hablo español  -  je parle français  -  jeg lærer norsk
chaals@opera.com          Try Opera 9.1     http://opera.com
Received on Monday, 30 April 2007 08:59:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:18:28 GMT