W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-sdwig@w3.org > January 2021

Re: [sdw] What is the intended directionality of time:before and time:after? (#1241)

From: Wouter Beek via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2021 23:26:49 +0000
To: public-sdwig@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-764021584-1611185207-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
@dr-shorthair I agree that the IRIs should not be changed now.  (Personally, I actually like the conciseness of `time:after` and `time:before`.)  But indeed the human-readable labels and descriptions could be updated a little bit for clarification purposes.

I would propose the following:

```turtle
time:after
  rdfs:comment "Asserts that the subject term denotes a temporal entity that occurs after the temporal entity denoted by the object term.  If a temporal entity S occurs after a temporal entity O, then the beginning of S is after the end of O.  As such, this property can be considered basic for instants and derived for intervals."@en;
  rdfs:label "is after"@en.

time:before
  rdfs:comment "Asserts that the subject term denotes a temporal entity that occurs before the temporal entity denoted by the object term.  If a temporal entity S is before another temporal entity O, then the end of S is before the beginning of O.  As such, this property can be considered basic for instants and derived for intervals."@en;
  rdfs:label "is before"@en.
```

My motivation is as follows:

  - The first sentence in the description unambiguously explains the meaning of an assertion in which this property is used, including the directionality.
  - The second sentence in the description is borrowed from the current version of the vocabulary, but T1/T2 are replaced by S/O, to make the relationship to the positionality (subject term / object term) a little bit more explicit.
  - The third sentence in the description is borrowed from the current description for `time:before`.  I'm not 100% sure this sentence really adds some useful information.  But if it is added for `time:before`, then it should also be added for `time:after`.
  - The labels are as suggested in my original post.  Some people use connecting verbs ("is", "has", etc.) as part of the IRIs, but I actually like the approach where the IRI is simple (like `time:after` and `time:before` are) and the human-readable label adds that extra connecting verb that allows formal triples to connect to their corresponding human-readable sentences (e.g., "World War 2 is after World War 1", assuming the events have human-readable labels as well).

I'm not able to write the Spanish equivalents :-(  I hope that somebody else may be able to do so.


-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by wouterbeek
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/sdw/issues/1241#issuecomment-764021584 using your GitHub account


-- 
Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Wednesday, 20 January 2021 23:26:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 20 January 2021 23:26:52 UTC