- From: Bernard Vatant <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>
- Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2014 14:40:43 +0200
- To: Victor Porton <porton@narod.ru>
- Cc: Hm Hrm <unixprog@googlemail.com>, "semantic-web@w3.org" <semantic-web@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAK4ZFVG40tYC0+5iFRQLLiLa-gka570tx9=zccqgWLSdn4WnVg@mail.gmail.com>
Victor It will be easier to answer your question if you provid some explanation of what "operation" and "precedence" mean in your context. Otherwise, they can mean many things ... http://lov.okfn.org/dataset/lov/search/#s=operation http://lov.okfn.org/dataset/lov/search/#s=precedence 2014-09-01 14:28 GMT+02:00 Victor Porton <porton@narod.ru>: > 01.09.2014, 10:07, "Hm Hrm" <unixprog@googlemail.com>: > > On 08/31/2014 06:43 PM, Victor Porton wrote: > >> Suppose P is a precedence of operation X. Should I write "X a P ." or > >> "X :precedence P ." (in Turtle format)? > >> > >> What are (dis)advantages of both variants? > > > > Assuming that the property should link instance P to instance X, both of > > class :Operation, then you should use "X :precedence P". > > > > "X a P", a shortcut for "X rdf:type P", would imply that P is an > > rdf:Class and X an instance of said class P. Extending the semantics of > > 'rdf:type' and using an instance as a class seems a bad idea. > > P is a class (because I want rdf:subClassOf for properties. > > But I yet doubt whether an operation should be an instance of precedence. > > -- > Victor Porton - http://portonvictor.org > > -- *Bernard Vatant* Vocabularies & Data Engineering Tel : + 33 (0)9 71 48 84 59 Skype : bernard.vatant http://google.com/+BernardVatant -------------------------------------------------------- *Mondeca* 35 boulevard de Strasbourg 75010 Paris www.mondeca.com Follow us on Twitter : @mondecanews <http://twitter.com/#%21/mondecanews> ----------------------------------------------------------
Received on Monday, 1 September 2014 12:41:32 UTC