Agree with Richard. And, btw, if you are using EDG to model ontologies, it will facilitate this approach.
Go to Manage tab and check ‘Prefer SHACL’. Then, when you create a property there will be on rdfs:domain statement. Instead, a property shape will be automatically generated. On the property form, you will not see options for ranges, but will see SHACL constraint components that you can set up. Sent from my iPhone > On Jul 4, 2018, at 7:09 AM, Richard Cyganiak <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> On 4 Jul 2018, at 11:54, Bohms, H.M. (Michel) <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> So, to be sure (100-harmless), I could use even a subset of RDFS (“RDFS-“) >> without domain & range for sharing the vocabulary. >> Domain and range can come in at SHACL. > > Again, this is subjective, but I think that’s a reasonable approach. > >> ‘RDFS-‘ would then be simply: >> - rdfs:Class > > Yes > >> - rdfs:Property > > It’s actually rdf:Property > >> - rdfs:Datatype > > Rarely needed in vocabularies > >> - rdfs:subClassOf > > Yes > >> - rdfs:subPropertyOf > > Maybe — I try to model without it when possible, just to keep things simpler > >> - meta-stuff like: rdfs:label / rdfs:comment /rdfs:seeAlso / rdfs:isDefinedBy > > Yes, especially label and comment. The other two are used so inconsistently > “in the wild” that I don’t see much value in their inclusion, but no harm > either. > > Richard > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "TopBraid Suite Users" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TopBraid Suite Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
