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

Re: Inverse properties

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2014 22:27:57 +0100
Message-ID: <CAK-qy=6A=Z0xkcrazJxrZcYkC6D3Js3YusuTDVH0MA55sECTMQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfpschneider@gmail.com>
Cc: ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ <perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org>, W3C Web Schemas Task Force <public-vocabs@w3.org>, Martin Hepp <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>, Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
On 7 June 2014 20:02, Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 06/07/2014 11:40 AM, Dan Brickley wrote:
> [...]

>> Yes, indeed.
>> In fact there's a new release of the site in preparation (I'll send a
>> full msg monday) which makes 'inverse' relations navigable, as well as
>> sub-property / super-property links in a property hierarchy too.
> So the RDFS property hierarchy facility is now an official part of
> schema.org?
> Are the properties in schema.org that state in comments that they have a
> superproperty (e.g., collection) going to get superproperties?

http://sdopending.appspot.com/object etc.

The corresponding definitions in the underlying config look like this,

<div typeof="rdf:Property" resource="http://schema.org/collection">
 <span class="h" property="rdfs:label">collection</span>
 <span property="rdfs:comment">A sub property of object. The
collection target of the action.</span>
 <link property="rdfs:subPropertyOf" href="http://schema.org/object" />
 <span>Domain: <a property="http://schema.org/domainIncludes"
 <span>Range: <a property="http://schema.org/rangeIncludes"

Once this settles down we ought to remove the redundant prose from the
textual definition.

Received on Saturday, 7 June 2014 21:28:25 UTC

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