-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
prof:isTransitiveProfileOf needs more convincing case and/or example #8
Comments
+1 to @aisaac . I am actually unsure how Do we have a use case for this property? |
This predicate was included because @agreiner argued we needed a mechanism to have a "flat representation" - not that inheritance wasnt a fundamental requirement or had any specific "dangers" - its a convenience we dont specify how should be used. proposed action: include in examples. |
The proposal to add an example sounds of course good to me :-) |
Here is a candidate example. If we can agree on the purpose and construction of the example, I will draw diagrams for it (easier to version text!):
Question to all: does this example convey useful information? Could it be formulated differently? |
@nicholascar nitpicking: next time you post an example can you do carriage returns in the comment so that these checking it the example in github UI don't have to scroll horizontally? |
@nicholascar it conveys useful information, thanks! But it may have one flaw:
Also, in terms of formulation, my expectation would be that an example for a transitive property should not hint that data publishers have to materialize the statements of that property. In SKOS we were rather clear that the general expectation is that data publishers assert Here's the order of things that I would suggest:
I hope this helps. |
OK:
|
@nicholascar @aisaac In the diagram above, I believe that Profile is a named graph, not a class. There has to be a "thing" with an IRI that represents the profile. Also, I don't see that the dct:Standard class is relevant to the diagram. And one more: what is the box that just says "OWL"? And how is OWL Profiles of ISO... a profile of it? So I suggest: "Profile" (dark box) becomes "Profile X" |
@nicholascar it looks better now. Wrt formatting, I would recommend to split the example in several pieces of code with 'real text' in-between, not one piece of code with the explanations in comment (especially regarding the parts introduced at "Now, according to the semantics of prof:isTransitiveProfileOf" and after). But well I can try this myself after the example has been stabilized ;-) Wrt the content, I'm still not sure that the 'OWL Profile of ISO19160-1' really qualifies as a profile. The more I look at it the more I'm convinced this is a ResourceDescriptor, even though it's not one created by the publisher of the original standard. In fact I would really recommend against PROF venturing into the area of profile OWL. It's a bit like saying that an SHACL file is a profile of the SHACL.... Plus, OWL has already some "real" profiles, like OWL 2 EL and it's a completely different level of profiling (well in fact I believe it's a case true profiling, but between meta-vocabularies, not vocabularies - anyway again please let's not venture there...). |
As in the title...
This came to mind while writing the ESWC paper.
The property is not super-clear in https://w3c.github.io/dxwg/profilesont/ and there's no example for it.
Actually one could question whether it is needed, or whether it is just a "utility properties" to be derived from other statements, the same way that skos:broaderTransitive is in SKOS. That is to say, that they could be kept for amateurs only ;-) and put in an "advanced" section.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: