- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
- Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 08:38:23 -0700
- To: RDF WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <8EB57E99-6277-4322-9375-0DB56FB51C9F@danbri.org>
Seems some are switching *to* rdf:value? Perhaps the property has, erm, value after all? Dan Begin forwarded message: > From: ljgarcia <leylajael@gmail.com> > Date: 31 May 2012 07:56:57 PDT > To: Bibliographic Ontology Specification Group <bibliographic-ontology-specification-group@googlegroups.com> > Subject: rdf:value instead bibo:content > Reply-To: bibliographic-ontology-specification-group@googlegroups.com > > Hi all, > > I have seen at http://bibotools.googlecode.com/svn/bibo-ontology/trunk/doc/index.html > that bibo:content is deprecated and rdf:value is recommended instead. > We are working with portions of the document, e.g. sections and > paragraphs rather than the whole document. We need to model the > content so bibo:content seems to be the right property but (i) it is > deprecated, and (ii) it takes bibo:Document as domain. > Any suggestions? I find using rdf:value some inaccurate and confusing, > I rather to use a more specific property. > > Best regards, > > Leyla GarcĂa > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Bibliographic Ontology Specification Group" group. > To post to this group, send email to bibliographic-ontology-specification-group@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bibliographic-ontology-specification-group+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bibliographic-ontology-specification-group?hl=en. >
Received on Thursday, 31 May 2012 15:39:05 UTC