- From: Bob Ferris <zazi@smiy.org>
- Date: Fri, 09 Sep 2011 15:07:04 +0200
- To: semantic-web@w3.org
Hi Paul, On 9/8/2011 7:43 PM, Paul Wilton wrote: > Hi Bernard > Many of the items on Bobs list we have done for good reason either for > specialisation of the class, or for contract binding. > For example pns:Person inherits from foaf:Person as we wanted to enhance > the parent class, and make relationships to other entities in the model, > similarly for Location, and Organization. But of course inference would > result in the foaf statements being published too. > Again the label / comment properties are subproperties of rdfs:label > specifically for contract binding reasons. > I think collaborative ontology modelling should be done in a project independent way, especially if you intend that the ontologies you've developed should be utilised by other agents of your address domain (in your case the news publisher domain). > Thanks for pointing out the time namespace , I will fix it :) > Writh respect to tagging, we are aware of a number of public domain > tagging ontologies, but none of them have become the defacto tag > ontology (as foaf has in its domain). Feel free to choose one to help to establish a defacto tag ontology (I thought that's the way how defacto standards are established) ;) Cheers, Bo
Received on Friday, 9 September 2011 13:07:48 UTC