W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-vocabs@w3.org > January 2015

Re: Some interesting things that show up when using a reasoner to classify schema.org

From: ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ <perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org>
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 11:26:49 +0100
Message-ID: <54C0D069.5060003@wwelves.org>
To: public-vocabs@w3.org
On 01/21/2015 05:21 PM, Martin Hepp wrote:
> Hi Dan,
> A hands-on solution would be to add two internal "annotation" properties "rangeHint" and "domainHint" that allow explicitly triggering the display of certain schema.org types in the documentation.
>     <div typeof="rdf:Property" resource="http://schema.org/purpose">
> ...
>       <span>Range: <a property="http://schema.org/rangeHint" href="http://schema.org/MedicalDevicePurpose">MedicalDevicePurpose</a></span>
>       <span>Range: <a property="http://schema.org/rangeIncludes" href="http://schema.org/Thing">Thing</a></span>
>     </div>
> The documentation could then list the formal range (Thing) and popular types for the range (e.g. MedicalDevicePurpose)

Relates a property to a class that constitutes (one of) the expected
type(s) for values of the property.

Relates a property to a class that is (one of) the type(s) the property
is expected to be used on.

AFAIK both of those don't cause any inferences so in a way they already
act in a similar way to rangeHint and domainHint which you propose.

If rangeIncludes and domainIncludes have some *formal* consequences I
think they could use bit more of documenting.

BTW James M Snell in Activity Streams 2.0 uses owl:unionOf to specify
multiple types for domain and range. Maybe (domain/range)Includes could
act just as hints and schema.org could use something similar for
expressing *formal* consequences?


Received on Thursday, 22 January 2015 10:27:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:49:38 UTC