W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-dxwg-wg@w3.org > February 2019

[dxwg] Profiles Ontology Figure 3 (#731)

From: kcoyle via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2019 20:11:57 +0000
To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <issues.opened-406954791-1549397513-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
kcoyle has just created a new issue for https://github.com/w3c/dxwg:

== Profiles Ontology Figure 3 ==
Figure 3 of the profiles ontology contains some "difficulties" that need to be addressed.

 ![title](https://w3c.github.io/dxwg/profilesont/examples/isInheritedFrom.svg)

First, there is the inclusion of the rdf:type's as "things" in the diagram. While not inaccurate, they are unnecessary and make the diagram more difficult to read. While classes can be useful, they are generally considered to be semantic aspects of entities and not separate things in themselves.

Second, there is here a "Standard X" that has a prof:hasResource linked to RS 1.  AFAIK, standards are not covered by PROF, only profiles are, so it's confusing that this "Standard X" has a PROF-defined resource. If it is a standard then I would expect for there to be a profile that is a profile of that standard that then has a resource. At that point the diagram would have two profiles (maybe X and Y), with X having resource RS 1 and Y having resources RS 2 & 3.

Suggested:
1) remove boxes denoting classes. The class'ness is included in the definition of the properties (their domains)
2) resolve the issue of Standard X and "has resource" (the other option is that PROF has to become an ontology for both non-profiled standards as well as profiles)

Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/731 using your GitHub account
Received on Tuesday, 5 February 2019 20:11:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 30 October 2019 00:15:50 UTC