Open jimjyang opened 3 months ago
Dear Jim,
We see no objection to explicitly include the ranges you mention to reflect the inverse of the 2 other instances of the dct:isPartOf relation. We can include the change in the next version. I labelled this issue as next-version as I do not see the need for discussion.
If someone is interested in discussing this in detail please indicate so and I will update the label of the issue to reflect this.
Best Regards, The SEMIC team
The range for the property dct:hasPart in the class Dataset should not be (only) PublicService. This is because not only the class PublicService has now the inverse property dct:isPartOf poiting to the class Dataset, but also the classes Evidence and Output.