Re: Missing subClassOf?

On 28 August 2013 15:29, Alex Milowski <alex@milowski.com> wrote:

> Why does http://schema.org/Class and http://schema.org/Property exist if
> the RDFa version uses rdfs:Class and rdfs:Property?
>

They're not intended for widespread use, but they help us define
rangeIncludes and domainIncludes within our existing documentation
framework. The docs should probably say that somewhere - I think I
mentioned same last week (here or in G+).

Dan


>
> On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 6:35 AM, Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org> wrote:
>
>> On 27 August 2013 22:41, Alex Milowski <alex@milowski.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I've been looking at [1] and [2] and the subClassOf property
>>> definition [3] is missing .
>>>
>>> [1] http://www.schema.org/docs/full_md.html
>>> [2] http://www.schema.org/Class
>>> [3] http://www.schema.org/subclassOf
>>>
>>
>> I think we should mark [1] as an early (unsupported etc.) experiment in
>> using Microdata to show schema information. The RDFa version (linked from
>> http://schema.org/docs/datamodel.html) is more mature and approaching
>> stability. BTW each page for types, properties and enumerations also
>> contains a little RDFa/RDFS description of that term too.
>>
>> Dan
>>
>>
>>>  <http://www.schema.org/subclassOf>--
>>> --Alex Milowski
>>> "The excellence of grammar as a guide is proportional to the paucity of
>>> the
>>> inflexions, i.e. to the degree of analysis effected by the language
>>> considered."
>>>
>>> Bertrand Russell in a footnote of Principles of Mathematics
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> --Alex Milowski
> "The excellence of grammar as a guide is proportional to the paucity of the
> inflexions, i.e. to the degree of analysis effected by the language
> considered."
>
> Bertrand Russell in a footnote of Principles of Mathematics
>