Closed ghost closed 4 years ago
Ah yes, I didn't realise they were disjoint.
It looks like we should use :concept skos:inScheme :scheme .
instead of skos:member
(and traverse the relation the opposite way around).
The skos:inScheme
link was added as part of 23e16e2e. This left the erroneous skos:member
statements in place as queries in other Swirrl applications are relying on it. Once those downstream applications are fixed #90 can be merged to resolve this issue.
Fixed in PR #119
generates <http://example.org/def/concept-scheme/{cs} rdf:type skos:ConceptScheme; skos:hasTopConcept <http://example.org/def/concept/{c} skos:member <http://example.org/def/concept/{c}.
However the domain of skos:member is skos:Collection, which is defined as disjoint from skos:ConceptScheme.