Simon,
exactly. Your example will be understood by every standard reasoner
without having to know what a skos:Concept is.
skos:inScheme does not add any information.
If we want to refer to the domain specific notion of concept schemes, we
might say:
skos:inScheme rdfs:subPropertyOf
[Apologies for continuing the cross-posting]
A pattern of using sub-classes of skos:Concept to denote a group of
concepts (and thus be able to use rdfs:range in associated ontologies)
is a good one. It is recommended best practice in data.gov.uk linked
data work, for example.
This does not
Am 23.08.2012 10:40, schrieb Dave Reynolds:
[Apologies for continuing the cross-posting]
A pattern of using sub-classes of skos:Concept to denote a group of
concepts (and thus be able to use rdfs:range in associated ontologies)
is a good one. It is recommended best practice in data.gov.uk
Dear All,
We have three opportunities for talented people with interest in linked data
and/or education technology to join the Open University's work on linked data
for education.
Two of the open positions (project officer, 1 year each) relate to supporting
the development, practice and
Hi Thomas
I've been munching over this issue for maybe as many years as you have :)
... but somehow arrived to different conclusions.
Regarding the Geonames example you quote, the Geonames feature classes
and feature codes have been modeled as they are, as skos:ConceptScheme
and skos:Concept
On 23/08/12 10:22, Thomas Bandholtz wrote:
Am 23.08.2012 10:40, schrieb Dave Reynolds:
[Apologies for continuing the cross-posting]
A pattern of using sub-classes of skos:Concept to denote a group of
concepts (and thus be able to use rdfs:range in associated ontologies)
is a good one. It is
*** Preliminary Call for Papers ***
*** WWW 2013 - May 13-17 - Rio de Janeiro - Brazil ***
For more than two decades, the International World-Wide Web Conference
has been the premier venue for researchers, academics, businesses, and
standard bodies to come together and discuss latest updates
