Re: naming properties and classes in RDF

On Fri, 16 Nov 2001, Libby Miller wrote:

> >
> > I'm not sure what you consider to be redundant here.  The only things that
> > are typed twice are <rdf:type>, <_:1>, and <_:2>.
> Hi Peter
> Thanks for the reply. I wasn't very clear. I'm not concerned with the
> syntax, I'm bothered that designing schemas which have similar or
> identical names for certain properties and classes is confusing for
> authors, and also seems...wrong.

Yes, it often does feel somewhat redundant. All representational
conventions impose constraints on modelling style. In RDF, the restriction
to binary relations is a bit annoying when you want a simple way of saying
'between', for example. In this case, it's pretty live-able with, since
your classes can always get recycled for unexpected uses. In the
researchInterest/ResearchInterest example you might find re-use for the
members of the class ResearchInterest as things a dc:subject or moz:topic
might point to.



Received on Friday, 16 November 2001 11:59:07 UTC