- From: Bernard Vatant <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>
- Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 20:00:15 +0100
- To: Norman Gray <norman@astro.gla.ac.uk>
- Cc: semantic-web@w3.org
Hi Norman (agreeing with everything before that) > ...it would probably be more sensible to go in the other direction, > and say >> geo:lat rdfs:subPropertyOf vcard:latitude Why not the other way round? I would expect the geo: namespace to define very generic properties, independent of any specific use and any coordinates system. Use in vcard is a specific one, so one would expect vcard:latitude rdfs:subPropertyOf geo:lat > and nothing more. With a geo: namespace more generic that is is now, that is, with no reference to wgs84, that is e.g. http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/ or http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/pos# ... whatever. > In particular, it would probably be best to leave the vCard lat/long > as informally specified, and let WGS84, and ITRS, and ..., coordinates > to be subProperties of them, for those few specialists who care. + 1 -- *Bernard Vatant *Knowledge Engineering ---------------------------------------------------- *Mondeca** *3, cité Nollez 75018 Paris France Web: www.mondeca.com <http://www.mondeca.com> ---------------------------------------------------- Tel: +33 (0) 871 488 459 Mail: bernard.vatant@mondeca.com <mailto:bernard.vatant@mondeca.com> Blog: Leçons de Choses <http://mondeca.wordpress.com/>
Received on Thursday, 23 November 2006 19:00:27 UTC