W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-vocabs@w3.org > June 2014

Re: Inverse properties

From: ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ <perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org>
Date: Sat, 07 Jun 2014 11:37:00 +0200
Message-ID: <5392DD3C.6040109@wwelves.org>
To: public-vocabs@w3.org
CC: Martin Hepp <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>, Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
On 04/14/2014 12:11 PM, Dan Brickley wrote:
> On 14 April 2014 11:03, martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org
> <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org> wrote:
>> FYI: I just created and populated a W3C wiki page for the topic:
>> https://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas/InverseProperties
> Thanks Martin! That's been on my todo list. However I don't yet see
> any content in the page ("There is currently no text in this page
> ..."), perhaps some problem saving it?

Looking at:

I have impression that


already has inverse property


Maybe we should document all properties which already have inversed
properties defined? Would it make sense to make them 'legacy' pattern
just as properties with plural names? I worry that apps consuming data
following schema.org concepts may need to deal with both ways of stating
the same relationship, when pair of inverse properties exist but one can
*also* use @rev

I think section *Instances of (Event) may appear as values for the
following properties* can give a good clue about when to use inverse

For one case i need to use inverse of

While http://schema.org/location seems to make sense for
http://schema.org/Place in case of http://schema.org/Organization I may
need to use http://schema.org/event as inverse, meaning ORGANIZER of
this event (somehow matching one in: http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfcal/#testdr
), or maybe it matches as inverse better http://schema.org/attendee and
we may need to add http://schema.org/organizer |
http://schema.org/host similar as we have http://schema.org/performer
I already proposed adding it in:

BTW somehow relevant discussion in Hydra CG:

""IME, a lot of people (outside the SemWeb community) find traversing
links in
the reverse direction "unnatural" and "hacky".

It may also be that it is much more efficient (performant) to follow the
forward link instead of the reverse links as there are much fewer of
them."" -- Markus Lanthaler

My apologies if I throw to many loosely related thoughts in single
message ;)
Received on Saturday, 7 June 2014 09:39:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:49:32 UTC