Hi all, > > rdf:seeAlso (http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-schema/#ch_seealso) has an unconstrained range ... therefore, what would be wrong in using this property for this purpose? > > locn would probably want to add a (recommendation) note explaining what the seeAlso means in the locn context (i.e. bridge to legacy GNIS or other identifiers), which brings us back to the question on how this should be done in the vocabulary specification. We are indeed here lacking some good practices recommendation (see also the email from Andrea,http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-locadd/2014Jan/0037.html). What about using a similar case of org:identifier for this identifier ? See http://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-org/#org:identifier Cheers, Ghislain
Received on Tuesday, 7 January 2014 11:52:59 UTC