search

OP-TED / ePO

The eProcurement Ontology provides the formal, semantic foundation for the creation and reuse of linked open data in the domain of public procurement in the EU.
European Union Public License 1.2
58 stars 18 forks source link

don't hijack external definitions #393

Open VladimirAlexiev opened 1 year ago

VladimirAlexiev commented 1 year ago

ePO_owl_core.ttl defines 655 terms, of which 53 are external (not in the epo: namespace). They are at the end of https://gist.github.com/VladimirAlexiev/c1f8797b4412df0708b41f90f512862a.

It's better not to redefine external terms that you use. Some people call this "namespace hijacking" and strongly frown upon it.

IMHO it's just fine to redeclare descriptions in a use-case defined way.

But then it's better to provide this in a separate ontology. Eg DCAT3 splits their ontologies in this way:

However IMHO, it is not ok to change the meaning of properties.

Eg DCT defines

dct:alternative
    rdfs:subPropertyOf dc:title, dct:title ;
    rdfs:label "Alternative Title"@en ;
    rdfs:comment "An alternative name for the resource."@en .

You redefine the same prop as follows:

dct:alternative  rdf:type  owl:DatatypeProperty ;
        rdfs:comment     "Any name by which an individual is known other than their full name.\nWG 09/11/2021 (cpv:Person) "@en ;
        rdfs:label       "Alternative"@en ;

It is true that DCT does not define the domain since it describes "any internet resources", but it's clear this is intended to be used for Creative Works, not Persons: People have names, not titles. So by changing the description in this way, you've changed the meaning.

Please find a better prop to reuse in foaf or schema.