Re: [dxwg] versioning and resource status (#1238)

Without being familiar with ADMS, and following @dr-shorthair 's concern about incoherent inferences due to multiple ontology imports, it seems to me the operational criteria for whether to import or not should involve what kind of assertions/restrictions/implications are brought by the imported vocabulary.  If the import target is simple a bunch of owl:class assertions with rdfs:label and other annotation properties, maybe some rdfs:subClassOf assertions (internal to the vocabulary), then the import is not problematic.   On the other hand, if the import has a bunch of domain and range restrictions,  transitive, inverse properties, owl:restriction assertions, and other statements that have inferencing implications, then there is good reason to decouple the ontologies-- implement local classes and properties, and offer a mapping ontology that can be imported in a profile to bring in the implications from the more 'semantically rich' ontology.  I think this is the pattern used in SOSA and makes a lot of sense to me.

So, what kind of implications does adms:status bring?

GitHub Notification of comment by smrgeoinfo
Please view or discuss this issue at using your GitHub account

Received on Wednesday, 3 June 2020 15:54:03 UTC