Re: Extending RDFS, property-classes

Hi,
in collaboration with Richard Cyganiak I present:
http://esw.w3.org/topic/PropertyReificationVocabulary
All comments welcome.

Best regards,
Jiri Prochazka

PS: Please respond on the wiki if you can.


Jiri Prochazka píše v Po 09. 02. 2009 v 21:54 +0100:
> Hi,
> inspired with recent discussion with Richard Newman ("RDF vocabulary
> scope guidelines, promoting properties to classes  - property
> identifiers") I have a suggestion to make.
> 
> RDF has no way of identifying predicate (property) uses (triples), which
> only restricts information about them to:
> 1) about what they state something (domain)
> 2) what they state about something (range)
> 
> This is insufficient for number of uses, take for example Richards tag
> ontology: http://www.holygoat.co.uk/projects/tags/
> 
> Apart from properties tag:taggedWithTag and tag:isTagOf, it defines
> class tag:Tagging, which extends them (it is these properties promoted
> to class), allowing more information about the relation to be expressed.
> 
> This is a good thing, but unfortunately there is no link between the
> properties and the class, which makes the data tagged with the
> properties and the data tagged with the class, like they each used
> different non-interlinked vocabularies...
> 
> I suggest to develop an extension to the vocabulary describing
> vocabularies (RDFS, OWL), so vocabulary designers could specify the link
>  and inferencing engines could work with it...
> 
> The vocabulary should map the property to the property-class since the
> expressiveness of the property is subset of the one of the property-class.
> 
> Basically the vocabulary draft should be:
> 
> :isPromotedProperty a rdf:Property ;
>  rdfs:domain rdfs:Class ;
>  rdfs:range rdf:Property .
> # But also it should use it's own philosophy on itself:
> :PropertyPromotion a rdfs:Class ;
>  rdfs:subClassOf rdf:Property .   (really not sure here)
> :promotionOf a rdf:Property ;
>  rdfs:domain :PropertyPromotion ;
>  rdfs:range rdf:Property .
> :hasDomain a rdf:Property ;
>  rdfs:subPropertyOf rdfs:domain ;   (really not sure here)
>  rdfs:domain :PropertyPromotion .
> :hasRange a rdf:Property ;
>  rdfs:subPropertyOf rdfs:range ;   (really not sure here)
>  rdfs:domain :PropertyPromotion .
> # And final craziness:
> :PropertyPromotion a :PropertyPromotion ;
>  :promotionOf :isPromotedProperty ;
>  :hasDomain rdfs:Class ;
>  :hasRange rdf:Property .
> :PropertyPromotion :isPromotedProperty :isPromotedProperty .
> 
> Important is that the conversion can be done both directions.
> 
> Please comment on this proposal.
> If at least some people think this is a good idea, I could work on the
> vocabulary and rdfs:label and rdfs:comment it and publish it, however in
> corner of my mind I think it would need backing of W3C to be of any use
> (as all vocabulary describing vocabularies).
> 
> Kind regards,
> Jiri Prochazka
>

Received on Friday, 20 February 2009 00:25:33 UTC