- From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
- Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2014 20:02:48 +0100
- To: <public-hydra@w3.org>
Thomas, could you please add a blank line between what you quote and what you write. That would make it easier to parse your mails. Thanks! More inline On Tuesday, February 04, 2014 11:25 PM, Thomas Hoppe wrote: > > The Schema.org partners are actively discussing to include this > > concept (and a few others from Hydra) directly into Schema.org. > > See: > > > > http://bit.ly/1ik8LNm > > Well this is not what I consider a sound approach for "inclusion" > because they just copy over > stuff like with Goodrelations instead referencing referencing them like > in usual for ontologies. Whether you like it or not, that's how they do it. > Put as offensive question: Why are they not using Hydra if they need a > concept like supported property. Because using multiple vocabularies is more difficult than using a single one (especially with Microdata). [...] > > @prefix s: <http://schema.org/> . > > > > s:isbn rdf:type owl:Property, > > rdf:type rdf:Property ; > > s:domainIncludes s:Book ; > > s:rangeIncludes s:Text ; > > rdfs:comment "The ISBN of the book."@en ; > > rdfs:label "isbn"@en . > > > > Is this the information you were looking for? If you look at [2] you > > will see what I meant with the reverse-index. > > > > > > [1] http://rdf-translator.appspot.com/convert/detect/turtle/html/http%3A%2F%2Fsc > > hema.org%2Fisbn > > [2] http://rdf-translator.appspot.com/convert/detect/turtle/html/http%3A%2F%2Fsc > > hema.org%2FBook > > Yepp that's at least what the Web page shows up for human users and > obviously you can scrape this from > the RDFa as you said before. However, I hope that they come up with a > OWL which is on par. What do you mean by "a OWL"? A single file which contains all this information? You should ask for that on public-vocabs@w3.org That's the schema.org list. -- Markus Lanthaler @markuslanthaler
Received on Wednesday, 5 February 2014 19:03:21 UTC