Re: Define/change the range of "supportedProperties" (ISSUE-37) from Ruben Verborgh on 2014-03-10 (public-hydra@w3.org from March 2014)

From: Ruben Verborgh <ruben.verborgh@ugent.be>
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2014 17:47:55 +0000
To: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
Cc: public-hydra@w3.org
Message-Id: <24EE25E1-BA6A-41D8-B67F-CE8ED71192C9@ugent.be>

> And if we were to loosen the range requirement?
> 
>  "A class can have a supportedProperty that is either a Property or a
> PropertyDescription."

Then we're doomed ;-)
Humans will be confused,
and so will machines, because it will be difficult to find out which is which.
(I can only hope they would be distinct classes then.)

> I'm sorry, I can't think of anything better at the moment. One of the
> alternatives I've thought of (but which I don't particularly like) is to
> separate properties from their "descriptions". Something like
> 
>  Class supportedProperty foaf:name 
>        propertyRestriction [ property foaf:name
>                              required true ]

I like the blank node here,
but supportedProperty strongly implies that it is a property, which it isn't.

With "supportedProperty" => "supports" that doesn't happen,
but "supports" might be vague.

Best,

Ruben

Received on Monday, 10 March 2014 17:48:30 UTC