search

HydraCG / Specifications

Specifications created by the Hydra W3C Community Group
Other
139 stars 25 forks source link

Add domainIncludes/rangeIncludes statements #48

Closed lanthaler closed 5 years ago

lanthaler commented 10 years ago

_Proposed by Jindřich Mynarz:_

One of the key aids that helped me to understand Hydra is its diagram, which provides a good overview of how Hydra's vocabulary terms are related. However, what I find confusing is that some of the relations depicted in the diagram aren't present in Hydra's description in RDF. In particular, I'm missing rdfs:domain (or schema:domainIncludes) axioms, which would help me (and, presumably, other developers with semantic web background) to orient in the vocabulary. Having rdfs:domain explicitly set for properties would help to recognize which classes are the properties compatible with; even if this is to be treated with open world assumption as just a hint.

I've scanned through the RDF description of the Hydra Core Vocabulary and found the following properties, which could be enriched with rdfs:domain or schema:domainIncludes, which would likely be a better fit in this case. For each property I tried to guess, mostly using the Hydra's vocabulary diagram, what are its compatible classes.

Is this a more or less correct understanding? I think having these relationships explicitly documented in the vocabulary (and not only in the vocabulary's diagram) would make its intended uses clearer.

pmcb55 commented 10 years ago

+1

alien-mcl commented 5 years ago

Closed with PR #176