Re: URIs for properties at

Note that the just-released Microdata to RDF draft defines property URI generation using the same domain as the @itemtype, not relative to the type itself. Read about it at [1]; comments welcome, feedback to



On Oct 12, 2011, at 1:44 AM, Bob Ferris wrote:

> Hi,
> On 10/12/2011 9:45 AM, Bernard Vatant wrote:
>> Thanks for the pointer to <>
>> An issue I clearly see with URIs such as
>> is that some properties are used by more than one class. So we'll have
>> for example and
>> potentially misleading to the idea that
>> they are different properties with specific domains, although the
>> definition found for "duration" is exactly the same at both
>> and : "The duration of
>> the item (movie, audio recording, event, etc.) in ISO 8601 date format
>> <>." So it's another argument for
>> having this definition clearly published at a single place, under
>> - with expected range
>> (which BTW would lead to the side issue
>> of having a property and its range just differing by one character case,
>> not a good practice in my opinion).
> +1 for excluding the class domains in the URIs of multiple classes spanning properties, i.e., a name is a name is a name. A human user and also a machine will get the relation (specific meaning) of name via its context, i.e., the types of that resource, e.g., schemaorg:Person => a person's name etc.
> Cheers,
> Bo
> PS: otherwise we would probably end up with something the like the Freebase vocabulary ;)

Received on Friday, 14 October 2011 22:11:50 UTC