Re: property/class ambiguity in languages with no letter case

On this occasion I really am trying to avoid getting into the debate 
about whether it is right or not to use an object property with a label 
that is the same as the class that is its range, differentiated only by 
the case of the first letter. That is an issue, and we prob should clear 
it up, but not today (and I suspect there is a lot of agreement on this).

I'm just asking, do you agree or not that foo -> Foo *implies* 'has foo' 
-> Foo sufficiently strongly that a translation of the label into a 
language that does not have upper and lower case letters can indeed be 
'has foo?'

Phil.

On 11/02/2014 10:46, Jindřich Mynarz wrote:
> OK, I thought I must have misunderstood that. (However, you can argue that
> you can provide owl:equivalentProperty links between the translated URIs.)
>
> If translating rdfs:labels is indeed the case, then why not have 2
> vocabulary terms with the same label? Is it because it confuses vocabulary
> users and worsens usability of the vocabulary in question? What other
> concerns do you have on mind?
>
> - Jindřich
>

-- 


Phil Archer
W3C Data Activity Lead
http://www.w3.org/2013/data/

http://philarcher.org
+44 (0)7887 767755
@philarcher1

Received on Tuesday, 11 February 2014 11:01:42 UTC