Re: use role nouns (e.g. subject) not verbs (isSubjectOf)?

If you use transliterated japanese words, then DanC won't know if you're  
using the pattern he likes or not...

and we might find it easier to get SKOS used in japan...

chaals (who really doesn't care what you put in the URI but really hates  
labels that are camelCasePseudoWords)

On Wed, 2 Mar 2005 17:54:07 -0500, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org> wrote:

>
> I noticed skos:isSubjectOf in
>   http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core/guide/
>   15 February 2005
>
> I have found rdfs:subClassOf to be awkward in a lot of cases; in  
> retrospect,
> I wish we had called it rdfs:superclass.
>
> I also found skos:hasTopConcept. I didn't search exhuastively, so there
> may have been others.
>
> Does it really seem useful to define the inverses for these properties?
>   skos:subject, skos:isSubjectOf, skos:primarySubject and  
> skos:isPrimarySubjectOf.
> I think owl:inverseOf is fine for post-hoc declaration of inverses, but  
> let's
> not make up aliases, even indirectly like this, if we can help it. It  
> just makes
> dealing with this sort of data more expensive.
>
> p.s. see also http://esw.w3.org/topic/RoleNoun
>
> p.p.s. The draft says "This document is the First Public Working Draft"  
> but it's
> not. Always keep the SOTD truthful, please.
>



-- 
Charles McCathieNevile - Vice Presidente - Fundacion Sidar
charles@sidar.org                      http://www.sidar.org
     (chaals is available for consulting at the moment)

Received on Thursday, 3 March 2005 14:10:40 UTC