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 13:15:23 +0100
Message-ID: <54C0E9DB.1020806@wwelves.org>
To: Martin Hepp <martin.hepp@unibw.de>
CC: W3C Web Schemas Task Force <public-vocabs@w3.org>, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
On 01/22/2015 12:48 PM, Martin Hepp wrote:
> Ah! Yes, that is also a viable way, much better than my proposal! The key advantage over my proposal is that the Python code for generating the documentation does not need to change - rangeIncludes effectively becomes rangeHint and domainIncludes domainHint, and the integrity constraint axioms will be modeled using rdfs:domain and rdfs:range with complex class definitions, as in this example (from GoodRelations):
> gr:condition a owl:DatatypeProperty;
> 	rdfs:comment "A textual description of the condition of the product or service, or the products or services included in the offer (when attached to a gr:Offering)"@en;
> 	rdfs:domain  [ a owl:Class;	
> 				   owl:unionOf (gr:Offering gr:ProductOrService) ];
> 	rdfs:isDefinedBy <http://purl.org/goodrelations/v1>;
> 	rdfs:label "condition (0..1)"@en;
> 	rdfs:range rdfs:Literal.
Glad to hear that you like this twist on your proposal :)

*IMO* it would also take us closer to comfortably basing work in Social
WG on schema.org instead of creating parallel ActivityStream Extended
Vocabulary (which BTW next weeks goes live as second WD and we just
discussed again CR process for it during our telecon last tuesday)


Received on Thursday, 22 January 2015 12:15:50 UTC

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