- From: Renato Iannella via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2017 02:28:47 +0000
- To: public-poe-archives@w3.org
1) I agree - we need to assert all terms in the ODRL Ontology as skos:Concept (so that we can use the skos collections, and definition, note, etc) I do not know why we have defined an "actions" skos:ConceptScheme ? Why do we need to ? 2) The *inference* from using hasPolicy is that the asset you are describing/identifying is the target Asset of the identified policy (and makes no other assumptions about the policy..could be a Set, or empty or....) 3) I don't have an issue with both rdfs:Classs and owl:Class Nothing breaks, so lets leave it 4) We should use owl property types as well. 5a) Agree - see 1) 5b/c) We need skos:collections as that is used by the script to create the Vocab specification sections. We can reorder any terms in any collection.... I am suggesting we drop the actions skos:ConceptScheme completely as I can't see who will use it? commit: 3db6469e689091a7e19cb49fa9ce8ab6daa15d6e -- GitHub Notification of comment by riannella Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/poe/issues/188#issuecomment-306363962 using your GitHub account
Received on Tuesday, 6 June 2017 02:28:53 UTC