I agree with you Nick, I made a similar comment at the SIG meeting. It would be a good idea for future reuse. The only only down side is that the learning curve to manually read RDF documents becomes harder. And we really start to sound like minimalist if we only use letters and numbers.
Marco On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 2:51 PM, Nicholas Crofts <[email protected]> wrote: > Dear all, > > I've been doing some work recently using the CRM rdfs. > http://cidoc.ics.forth.gr/rdfs/cidoc_v4.2.rdfs > > The naming convention adopted for the class and property identifiers strikes > me as inconvenient in some respects. > Currently, the names used for the class and property identifiers contain > both the CRM code and the English label. > > 1. If the labels get changed at any time in the future, the identifiers are > broken > 2. Non English speakers are put at a disadvantage > 3. The rdf syntax is more verbose than necessary ... this may sound trivial > but that overhead can be huge when migrating large datasets. > 4. The names have been mangled with underscores to make them respect xml/rdf > syntax. > > I would suggest using just the codes (i.e. E1, P2, etc.) as class > identifiers and including the names (in various languages) as rdf:labels. > > The result would like something like this: > > <rdfs:Class rdf:ID="E21"> > <rdfs:label xml:lang="en">Person</rdfs:label> > <rdfs:label xml:lang="fr">Personne</rdfs:label> > <rdfs:label xml:lang="gr">Πρόσωπο</rdfs:label> > <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="#E20" /> > <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="#E39" /> > </rdfs:Class> > > Rather than this: > > > <rdfs:Class rdf:ID="E21.Person"> > <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="#E20.Biological_Object" /> > <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="#E39.Actor" /> > </rdfs:Class> > > (NB I've removed the rdfs:comments for clarity) > > It would be nice, of course, to be able to have both forms and define > equivalence relationships between them. > This could perhaps be done with the rdfs:isDefinedBy property? but I'm not > sure that it's meant for this. If you move to the spec we can use owl:sameAs tp preserve versions > Best wishes > > Nick Crofts > > > > _______________________________________________ > Crm-sig mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig > >
