- From: <Simon.Cox@csiro.au>
- Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2017 10:25:53 +0000
- To: <janowicz@ucsb.edu>, <kerry.taylor@anu.edu.au>, <public-sdw-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <e355eee4604349b6a2d4aae38af7cc3f@exch1-mel.nexus.csiro.au>
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