- From: Ross Singer <rossfsinger@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 10:48:34 -0500
- To: Bernard Vatant <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>
- Cc: SKOS <public-esw-thes@w3.org>, Mike Bergman <mike@mkbergman.com>
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 10:34 AM, Bernard Vatant <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com> wrote: > Thanks for this. Indeed umbel:linksEntity seems to fill the slot. > Although I find its name, as well as the one of its inverse property > umbel:isAbout, quite misleading. Well, personally, I find almost everything about the vocabulary to be obtuse. When your elevator pitch has something about a hairnet over a basketball you're not exactly explaining why I would care or how I would use it. > How about something like umbel:hasReferent and umbel:isReferentOf , > respectively? I prefer those terms, yes, but I have nothing to do with vocabulary. > > BTW do you have any feedback on the use of this property in the wild? No. I use it simply because I don't know of a better solution (see: http://purl.org/NET/marccodes/languages/amh#lang or the proposal of lcsubjects.org to dbpedia here: http://dilettantes.code4lib.org:37341/30000) but I can't vouch for whether or not people find it useful or even know that it exists I thought dbpedia used to have umbel predicates in it, but I can't find any at the moment. -Ross.
Received on Thursday, 12 November 2009 15:49:07 UTC