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

Re: [dxwg] Definitions in Profiles Ontology (#755)

From: kcoyle via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2019 00:21:39 +0000
To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-473479399-1552695698-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
"making Profile a subclass os dct:Standard means its substituable as the range of any dct:conformsTo predicate." - dct:conformsTo was intended to describe conformance to standards, not conformance to anything. Profile should not be declared a subclass of dct:Standard because one wants to use dct:conformsTo - it should only be declared a subclass of dct:Standard if it meets the definition of a standard. I agree with the statement by @agreiner in #792 that not all creators will consider all of their profiles to be standards, and defining profile this way narrows the usability of PROF. It is better to use a minimum semantic commitment and allow users of the vocabulary to add type declaration where they wish.

GitHub Notification of comment by kcoyle
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/755#issuecomment-473479399 using your GitHub account
Received on Saturday, 16 March 2019 00:21:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:42:15 UTC