I have no confusion at all. I am using syntactic structures to connote
important semantic information. (01)
rdfs:subPropertyOf is interesting. It contains a preposition -- of --
that we agree upon. Semantically it is a subclassing mechanism but one
specific to properties, so there's no difference between
rdfs:subPropertyOf and rdfs:subClassOf, with that exception of
*context*. Properties may only be a subclass of other properties and
Classes may only be a subclass of other classes. And really, what is a
subclass other than a subdivision? (02)
Accordingly, it could have been rdfs:subdivisionOf -- that would
certainly be clearer to the average Joe, and it would have been
reusuable in other *contexts* -- the operative principle of *reuse*. (03)
But instead, we get two oracular properties, one a completely *made-up*
word (subProperty), rather than community consensus about a more
abstract concept. (04)
I'll address the generic nature of "is:of" later/jmc (05)
On 1/23/2014 9:21 AM, Krzysztof Janowicz wrote:
> I guess you are confusing namespaces with linguistic expressions.
> "is:about" would require an is namespace. How would id possibly help
> to rename a human understandable label such as rdfs:subPropertyOf into
> an overly generic is:of? is of what? is of blue color? One way to
> address your issues is to join the W3C RDF working group and
> contribute to their work to jointly improve RDF. Best, Krzysztof On
> 01/23/2014 08:55 AM, John McClure wrote: (06)
_________________________________________________________________
Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2014/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2014
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ (07)
|