[tdwg-content] Schema-last and crazy: correlated? [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Paul Murray pmurray at anbg.gov.au
Tue Feb 22 03:53:28 CET 2011


On 20/02/2011, at 1:24 PM, joel sachs wrote:

> I'm currently arguing  with  someone off-list about what I think is my 
> minimal example, that I hope that everyone can agree on. It's about domain 
> constraints on "hasIdentification". If I say
> 
> "http://fu.bar hasIdentifcation rabbit",
> 
> should we, as a community, interpret that to mean that http://fu.bar is an 
> individulOrganism (as opposed to, say, a picture)? Must I, as a guy who 
> likes to make assertions, be told either

been a while since I chimed in on this list.

hasIdentification has an RDF namespace. If the full name of the predicate is actually

	http://tdwg.org/voc/Organism#hasIdentification

Then it's probably quite reasonable to make the type assumption. If you want to make it more general, then define a more general predicate

	http://tdwg.org/voc/Common#hasIdentification

and type (IdentifiableThing), and make subclass/subproperty assertions. If the namespace/ontoogy that you are importing makes it clear that we are talking about organisms, then a person who uses that predicate to describe a painting is misusing the vocabulary and deserves what they get.

_______________________________________________


If you have received this transmission in error please notify us immediately by return e-mail and delete all copies. If this e-mail or any attachments have been sent to you in error, that error does not constitute waiver of any confidentiality, privilege or copyright in respect of information in the e-mail or attachments.

Please consider the environment before printing this email.


More information about the tdwg-content mailing list