- From: Uldis Bojars <captsolo@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2006 19:12:14 +0000
- To: semantic-web@w3.org
Forward to semantic-web list in order to get more feedback. Original discussion in the SIOC-Dev list: http://groups.google.com/group/sioc-dev In part, this discussion involves a question on what are best practices for creating ontologies. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Uldis Bojars <captsolo@gmail.com> Date: Dec 18, 2006 7:08 PM Subject: Re: OpenLink SIOC Enhancement Suggestions (3) To: sioc-dev@googlegroups.com Hi Richard, On 12/18/06, Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de> wrote: > > Kingsley, > > Why not use rdf:type and make weblog, wiki etc. subclasses of > sioc:Forum? Precisely - all the tools needed to express types of forums are already there: - rdf:type - SIOC types module [ http://rdfs.org/sioc/types ] The only thing that needs to be done is add forum subtypes to the types module. Currently it only has Comment - a subclass of Post. You could argue if subtypes of sioc:Forum should be in the main ontology or in a separate module. The motivation for a separate module is to keep the ontology generic enough and to have specific type hierarchies separate. Open to suggestions how to best do it. Speaking of being generic - some even argued that we should not have Comment at all because comments are just Posts that are replied to other posts. P.S. A suggestion for implementations: In order to help reasoners (or rather the fact that they are not yet widely used) let's do the job for them and specify that a forum is both sioc:Forum and its appropriate subtype (e.g. sioc_types:Weblog), even if there is a subclass relationship between them. Best, Uldis [ http://captsolo.net/info/ ]
Received on Monday, 18 December 2006 19:12:22 UTC