Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Use sdo:rangeIncludes to guide expectations on properties #912

Open
dr-shorthair opened this issue Apr 26, 2019 · 5 comments
Open

Use sdo:rangeIncludes to guide expectations on properties #912

dr-shorthair opened this issue Apr 26, 2019 · 5 comments
Labels
dcat future-work issue deferred to the next standardization round
Milestone
DCAT Future Prior...

Comments

@dr-shorthair
Copy link
Contributor

dr-shorthair commented Apr 26, 2019 •
edited
Loading

Many DCAT properties have (deliberately) un-constrained ranges - i.e. no rdfs:range. Nevertheless, there are many usage or scope notes recommending use of specified classes or types.

These recommendations could be captured more formally (though with no entailment penalty) using sdo:rangeIncludes. Perhaps we should add these as a kind of rich annotation?

Related to #119
@davebrowning
Copy link
Contributor

Added to future work do to time constraints. If the benefit was high enough perhaps it could be done in 2019 (assuming the changes were only in the non-normative rdf representations.)

@davebrowning davebrowning added the future-work issue deferred to the next standardization round label Sep 23, 2019
@davebrowning davebrowning mentioned this issue Sep 25, 2019
Closed
@andrea-perego andrea-perego added the due for closing Issue that is going to be closed if there are no objection within 6 days label Oct 29, 2020
@andrea-perego
Copy link
Contributor

@dr-shorthair , would you like to revive this issue?

@dr-shorthair
Copy link
Contributor Author

Yeah - I think it would be smart. SDO has continued to be very relevant in this space.

@dr-shorthair dr-shorthair removed the due for closing Issue that is going to be closed if there are no objection within 6 days label Mar 14, 2021
@smrgeoinfo
Copy link
Contributor

my only reservation would be the SDO guidance for sdo:rangeIncludes:

Values expected to be one of these types: sdo:Class
Used on these types: sdo:Property

I know those aren't binding in the rdf definitions....

@dr-shorthair
Copy link
Contributor Author

Mashing up this rule with RDFS entailments would merely make the target class also a sub-class of sdo:Class. Harmless AFAICT.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
dcat future-work issue deferred to the next standardization round
Projects
None yet
Milestone
DCAT Future Priority Work
Development

No branches or pull requests
5 participants
@smrgeoinfo @dr-shorthair @riccardoAlbertoni @andrea-perego @davebrowning