search

BONSAMURAIS / BONSAI-ontology-RDF-framework

Recommendations and discussions on ontology and RDF framework development
BSD 3-Clause "New" or "Revised" License
6 stars 3 forks source link

predicate --> bont:propertyType is there an alternative from RDF schema #30

Open agneta20 opened 4 years ago

agneta20 commented 4 years ago

The predicate propertyType is quite generic. Is there another predicate available from RDF schema that could be used?

I identified RDFS:allowedPropertyType An instance of ConstraintPropertyType that is used to specify the properties that the instances of a Class may have.

I think this is appropriate because BalanceablePropertyType consists only of quantities that follow the law of conservation (Eg Mass/Energy and excludes units that don't e.g No. of unit/ volume etc)

kuzeko commented 4 years ago

I don't understand this. Since we are defining a predicate under the bont prefix, we can call it in any way we want. There is no relationship at all between what bont:propertyType means and what rdfs:propertyType means.

boweidema commented 4 years ago

I think the concern here is that we should only use the bont prefix for items that are not already defined in other more relevant ontologies. But what you say, kuzeko, is that the bont:propertyType here is indeed addressing something so specific to BONSAI that we need to define a bont-specific meaning here?

kuzeko commented 4 years ago

The moment we use something under the bont: prefix, even if it shares the second part with any other schema, makes them completely unrelated, unless we explicitly provide a relation in the ontology, for instance, if we want (and I think we do not want to) we could say that bont:propertyType is subclassOf rdfs:propertyType .

So, let's use bont:propertyType or use something different as name, but in either case, we need to define ourselves what it is, and this bear not connection with rdfs:propertyType or any other existing property under any other volcabulary (unless we explicitly state that)