Re: Question on skos:subject domain

• From: Ian Dickinson <ian.dickinson@hp.com>
• Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2005 13:49:06 +0000
• To: public-esw-thes@w3.org
• Message-ID: <4219E6D2.9000603@hp.com>

Dave Reynolds wrote (in reply to Leonard Will):
> Whilst foaf:Document is pretty generally I don't think it is supposed to 
> be quite that general. For example, it would presumably be surprising to 
> find something that is both a foaf:Person and a foaf:Document.
And specifically, foaf:Person and foaf:Document are declared to be 
disjoint classes in the FOAF schema, so Leonard's definition is 
unsatisfiable using FOAF vocabulary.

> It would make sense to me to leave the domain of skos:subject undefined 
> or to define a skos:Document which is as general as that defined in your 
> glossary.
+1

Ian

Received on Monday, 21 February 2005 13:49:44 UTC