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

joel sachs jsachs at csee.umbc.edu
Wed Feb 23 23:05:22 CET 2011


Is that Organism#hasIdentification URI from the TDWG ontology? I thought 
the TDWG ontology was de facto deprecated. Am I wrong about that?

Not only does
not dereference, but it doesn't even generate real hits via Google. (Even
http://tdwg.org/voc is broken.)

My thoughts about hasIdentification are in the context of representing 
Darwin Core as rdf. I think it's important that we continue to allow (and 
encourage) spreadsheet represntations of DwC, and that these map naturally 
to de-normalized rdf.

I agree that it makes sense, as you suggest, to define hasIdentification 
as a property without domain constraints, and then introduce subProperties
individualHasIdentification, occurrenceHasIdentification,
pictureHasIdentification, etc., each with the appropriate domain. Then,
applications that know what they're doing can apply the correct property.

You wrote: "a person who uses that predicate to describe a
painting is misusing the vocabulary and deserves what they get."

The problem is that it's not just the person who misuses a vocabulary that
gets a mess of incorrect inferences. We all do.


On Tue, 22 Feb 2011, Paul Murray wrote:

> 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