Apologies for the confusion! I mean P177 assigned property type, not P171!
(I was working from memory, given that the numbers were reused … to cross the threads) Rob From: Robert Sanderson <[email protected]> Date: Friday, June 21, 2019 at 8:53 AM To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Subject: [Sci] Are O9 and P171 identical? Dear all, In working on a model for our conservation science folks, I observe [intended] that O9 and the new P171 both fill the same role – a subproperty of P2_has_type that goes from the activity to a property type, such that the explicit relationship between the observed entity and the measurement can be recorded. Does the introduction of P171 obviate the need for O9? Thanks! Rob
