RE: tidying ssn -- are you ok with?

Btw I never intended to claim that skos was ideal here, but it was convenient to separate out the different annotations,. A simple SPARQL update could then finalise it to the predicate/namespace of choice.

________________________________
From: Krzysztof Janowicz <janowicz@ucsb.edu>
Sent: Saturday, 4 February 2017 5:31:05 AM
To: Kerry Taylor; SDW WG Public List
Subject: Re: tidying ssn -- are you ok with?

Hi Kerry,

I think it would be great if we could discuss this in the group meeting next week. I would like to understand our motivation a bit better as well as some decisions that we are taking e.g., using skos:example without importing skos.

Have a nice weekend
Jano


On 02/03/2017 09:15 PM, Kerry Taylor wrote:
I’d like to follow the approach Simon used in sosa (as we discussed in a meeting last year, I think) to separate examples from descriptive comments in the ontology using skos:example.

Are you ok with me doing the same in ssn? I don’t  plan to change the content substantively (although I might reword an example a little if it seems a bit too hard to follow e.g. too brief). And I’m not going to add amore examples at this point --- just move the ones already there.

I will not import skos.

Btw– I think this means specgen that we are currently using for the spec doco will no longer be able to extract the example – nor for sosa .
-Kerry




--
Krzysztof Janowicz

Geography Department, University of California, Santa Barbara
4830 Ellison Hall, Santa Barbara, CA 93106-4060

Email: jano@geog.ucsb.edu<mailto:jano@geog.ucsb.edu>
Webpage: http://geog.ucsb.edu/~jano/
Semantic Web Journal: http://www.semantic-web-journal.net

Received on Sunday, 5 February 2017 10:26:37 UTC