Re: [dxwg] Use of dct:type with both Class and Concept

The issue is that is legal to  use of a skos:Concept where a range is rdfs:Class,  and this then is an explicit case of OWL punning.  (I believe this is "intended").

Whether there is another unstated contract that OWL-Full semantics may not be used as intended is a separate matter - i.e. is there a Use Case from which we may derive a requirement that OWL-DL semantics MUST be supported by use of DCAT?

I'm not stating that this unreasonable, just that we dont have evidence to force us to make such a constraint at this stage.

I also wonder whether this is a case where the best approach could be an explicit OWL-DL profile of DCAT, where OWL-DL reasoning can be assumed? 

I also think validation or identification of OWL profile is probably an necessary infrastructure demand if we want to enforce anything - its not IMHO reasonable to make all stakeholders expert in these matters.

GitHub Notification of comment by rob-metalinkage
Please view or discuss this issue at using your GitHub account

Received on Monday, 27 August 2018 23:57:13 UTC