Re: R2RML ontology bug? constant shortcut property definition not according to spec.

> On 24 Feb 2016, at 12:32, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> wrote:
> 
>> I can confirm that the domain definitions for rr:subject, rr:predicate, rr:object and rr:graph in https://www.w3.org/ns/r2rml.ttl <https://www.w3.org/ns/r2rml.ttl> do not match (or even resemble) the specification.
>> 
>> There are numerous other problems with the OWL representation of this namespace document.
>> 
>> I’m afraid the document is unfit for purpose and best ignored.
> 
> Or, alternatively, the document is updated and changed…

Yes, this would of course be preferable.

But there are numerous issues with the current document, so this would be a slightly bigger project.

Is it still known how the document was produced? There are HTML+RDFa, Turtle and RDF/XML variants (and possibly others?). Which one is the master copy? What toolchain was used to produce the others?

Richard




> 
> The point is: while it is not possible to change a file on /TR, I do not see any problem changing the namespace document in case there is a documented bug.
> 
> Ivan
> 
> 
>> 
>> Richard
>> 
>> 
>>> On 24 Feb 2016, at 11:08, Martin G. Skjæveland <martige@ifi.uio.no> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi all,
>>> 
>>> I think I have identified problems with the constant shortcut properties rr:subject, rr:predicate, rr:object and rr:graph in the R2RML ontology (http://www.w3.org/ns/r2rml). It seems at their domain definitions are wrong and not according to the specification text.
>>> 
>>> The attached test ontology contains two examples which are equivalent according to the recommendation text, but inconsistent according to the R2RML ontology. The attachment explains this in more detail.
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> Martin G. Skjæveland
>>> <r2rml-test.ttl>
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> ----
> Ivan Herman, W3C
> Digital Publishing Lead
> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ <http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/>
> mobile: +31-641044153
> ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704 <http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704>

Received on Wednesday, 24 February 2016 13:19:40 UTC