foaf:name

[wterkaj]

There's a problem with defining and using foaf:name as a datatype property because of a "datatype and annotation property ambiguity" in the source foaf ontology (see https://mailman.stanford.edu/pipermail/p4-feedback/2011-July/004010.html).
Other ontologies (e.g. SOSA, http://www.w3.org/ns/sosa/) use foaf:name as an annotation property.

If someone imports both SOSA and BOT, then the following error arises:
"Message: Illegal redeclarations of entities: reuse of entity http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name in punning not allowed [DataProperty: name, AnnotationProperty: name]"

Possible solutions: not defining foaf:name as a datatype property? not using foaf:name at all?

[GeorgFerdinandSchneider]

Thanks at @wterkaj for pointing this out. This certainly is a problem; Should be solved by ontology experts at LDAC 2017.

Options:

Remove foaf:name, e.g.:
dcterms:contributor "Mads Holten Rasmussen" ;

Remove triple:
foaf:name a owl:DatatypeProperty .

[GeorgFerdinandSchneider]

@maximelefrancois86 : what do suggest on this issue? It might make sense to drop foaf? Is there in SOSA or SEAS a best practice how to use FOAF?

[maximelefrancois86]

Option 2 would make the onto not OWL DL any more.
I suggest we change

foaf:name a owl:DatatypeProperty

to

foaf:name a owl:AnnotationProperty

[MadsHolten]

Did we settle on something here @maximelefrancois86?

[namedgraph]

@maximelefrancois86 owl:AnnotationProperty is not considered during inferencing AFAIK, so these are not really equal alternatives.

[maximelefrancois86]

I know @Antoine-Zimmermann likes challenges with the FOAF ontology, maybe he can help us choose the best solution here?

1. should I ask the W3C to change SOSA/SSN so that the declaration of foaf:name is changed from owl:AnnotationProperty to owl:DatatypeProperty, or
2. should we comply with SOSA/SSN and stick to using foaf:name as a owl:AnnotationProperty in ontologies that import SOSA/SSN ?

Thank you Antoine :-)

[Antoine-Zimmermann]

FOAF is a horrible mess but at least here I don't see any reason to go against the declaration of foaf:name as a datatype property. I would say SOSA is wrong. I don't know how W3C handles changes to OWL files but it would seem strange to me that changes can be made to the ontology document when the standard does not change. Nonetheless, in this case, I would consider it a bug.

[GeorgFerdinandSchneider]

This issue seems to be solveable and should be closed asap

There is a W3C standard on representing people and organization on the web: VCARD.

I suggest the following:
Remove the triples

foaf:Person a owl:Class .
foaf:name a owl:DatatypeProperty .
<http://maxime-lefrancois.info/me#> a foaf:Person ; 
foaf:name    "Maxime Lefrançois" .
  
<https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2033-859X> a foaf:Person ; 
foaf:name    "Georg Ferdinand Schneider" .

Add the following:

@prefix: vcard: <http://www.w3.org/2006/vcard/ns#> .
vcard:Individual a owl:Class .
vcard:fn a owl:DatatypeProperty .
<http://maxime-lefrancois.info/me#> a vcard:Individual; 
vcard:fn   "Maxime Lefrançois" .
 
<https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2033-859X> a vcard:Individual; 
 vcard:fn    "Georg Ferdinand Schneider" .

and remove the following

This should be also changed/ added in the alignment ontologies.

This also removes bnodes.

@Antoine-Zimmermann @wterkaj @maximelefrancois86 What are your opinions?

[GeorgFerdinandSchneider]

Decision W3C LBD CG call 02 June 2020:

• Introduce vcard/ schema.org based annotation of persons
• remove bnodes

Also align with discussion dgarijo/Widoco#285

[GeorgFerdinandSchneider]

closed by #92