- From: KANZAKI Masahide <mkanzaki@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2014 20:03:28 +0900
- To: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
- Cc: "public-vocabs@w3.org" <public-vocabs@w3.org>
Hello, There has been discussions on whether property names should be nouns or verbs. You might find JeniT's article [1] and RoleNoun entry at W3C Wiki [2] interesting, for example. BTW, noun property names work better at least in Japanese, e.g. :book :著者 :dan . # 著者 = author seems OK, while verb form would be tricky: has-author style (:著者を持つ) sounds strange partly because Japanese sentense has SOV structure rather than SVO. Instead, :book :の著者は :dan . # ≒ whose author is makes sense, though almost not acceptable as a property name. cheers, [1] http://www.jenitennison.com/blog/node/128 [2] http://www.w3.org/wiki/RoleNoun 2014-04-21 7:12 GMT+09:00 Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>: > > > On 4/20/14, 12:11 PM, Dan Scott wrote: > >> >> branchOf >> causeOf >> comprisedOf >> estimatesRiskOf >> increasesRiskOf >> isPartOf >> isVariantOf >> memberOf >> predecessorOf >> successorOf >> >> And the currently used "isFoo" properties are: >> >> isAvailableGenerically >> isBasedOnUrl >> isConsumableFor >> isFamilyFriendly >> isGift >> isPartOf >> isProprietary >> isRelatedTo >> isSimilarTo >> isVariantOf >> > > I always get worried about language misunderstandings whenever prepositions > are involved. I don't know how all this reads to non-native speakers of > either British or American English, but I do know that even between those > two the prepositions can vary: "Have a chat to" vs. "Have a chat with" is > pretty innocent vis-a-vis schema.org, but the American "agree to something" > is simply "agree something" in British English, so a property "agreeTo" > would be strange to a British speaker. And I don't see what would be > ambiguous about: > X -> related -> Y > especially when read following the W3C document's model: > > Y is the value of -> related -> for X > X has property -> related -> with a value Y > > although: > the related -> of X is -> Y > > is awkward, whereas > the title -> of X is Y > > is not. I agree with Thad's "KISS" - keeping it simple. > > kc > > > -- > Karen Coyle > kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net > m: 1-510-435-8234 > skype: kcoylenet > -- @prefix : <http://www.kanzaki.com/ns/sig#> . <> :from [:name "KANZAKI Masahide"; :nick "masaka"; :email "mkanzaki@gmail.com"].
Received on Monday, 21 April 2014 11:03:58 UTC