Re: On linking vocabularies (Was: SKOS for schema.org proposal for discussion)

Hi Mike,

On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 2:32 AM, Mike Bergman <mike@mkbergman.com> wrote:

> Hi Niklas,
>
> Please see below . . .
>
>
> On 10/9/2013 6:10 PM, Niklas Lindström wrote:
>
>>
>> [...]

>  (With this, other parts of well-known vocabularies, like DC and FOAF,
>>
>  could be explicitly mapped to lessen the need for choice or redundancy
>> in certain cases. And in a more distant future, perhaps this "vocabulary
>> aliasing" practice could be extended to take other equivalencies than
>> the ones schema.org <http://schema.org> itself declares into account.
>>
>> E.g. using a pattern like the one we defined in RDFa 1.1, called
>> "Vocabulary Expansion" [2].)
>>
>
> It is unclear what the "very small sub-set of OWL entailment[s]" are in
> the [2] reference. Could you expand or point to the definitive reference?
>

That is the definitive reference – the details are further down in that
section. Specifically in "10.1.1 RDFa Vocabulary Entailment" [1].

(Granted, that in turn says: "The relevant rules are, using the rule
identifications in section 4.3 of [OWL2-PROFILES]): prp-spo1, prp-eqp1,
prp-eqp2, cax-sco, cax-eqc1, and cax-eqc2." – i.e. in [2].)

Cheers,
Niklas

[1]: http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-syntax/#s_vocab_entailment
[2]:
http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-profiles/#Reasoning_in_OWL_2_RL_and_RDF_Graphs_using_Rules



> Thanks, Mike
>
>
>> Cheers,
>> Niklas
>>
>> [1]:
>> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/**webschema/file/3879206aa3f7/**
>> schema.org/ext/dataset.html<https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webschema/file/3879206aa3f7/schema.org/ext/dataset.html>
>> [2]: http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-**syntax/#s_vocab_expansion<http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-syntax/#s_vocab_expansion>
>>
>>
>>