- From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
- Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 11:51:23 +0200
- To: "'Renato Iannella'" <ri@semanticidentity.com>
- Cc: <semantic-web@w3.org>
On Thursday, October 24, 2013 2:39 AM, Renato Iannella wrote: > On 23 Oct 2013, at 05:07, Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net> > wrote: > > > I've started to work on this today and noticed that the ontology is somewhat > > inconsistent in regard to strings. In some cases you language-tag them (e.g. > > vcard:adr's rdfs:label), in some you don't (e.g. vcard:adr's rdfs:comment), > > and in other you type them as xsd:string (e.g. vcard:Home's rdfs:label). I > > think it would make sense to consolidate all of them to language- tagged > > strings or is there are reason for the current state? > > I think this was due to changing rdf/owl editors during the development > of the new ontology. > (Note: It seems in Protege that you can only select the Type _or_ the > Lang of a property, not both?) That's due to a limitation in RDF. The only type that can be language-tagged is rdf:langString (note, not rdf:string!). In RDF 1.0 language-tagged strings didn't have any type. > We will update with both string and lang. Ignore string and just set lang, that's enough. They will be implicitly typed to rdf:langString in RDF1.1 tools. I think you should also add a rdfs:definedBy pointing the ontology itself to every concept. -- Markus Lanthaler @markuslanthaler
Received on Thursday, 24 October 2013 09:51:56 UTC