search

buda-base / owl-schema

BDRC Ontology Schema
11 stars 2 forks source link

add constants namespaces #122

Open xristy opened 5 years ago

xristy commented 5 years ago

I think we need to separate the various instances under Type into Constant namespaces:

@prefix bdoc: <http://purl.bdrc.io/ontology/core/constant/>
@prefix admc: <http://purl.bdrc.io/ontology/adm/constant/>

This will clarify what are resources that are the subjects of the buda domain versus what are tokens that represent various elements of the ontology such as admc:StatusReleased.

Constants will allow to attach properties - which isn't really feasible with literals - as we currently do with bdr: instances, and will not require that we associate status and audit log info and such that are associated with :Person, :Work and so on.

Essentially, various types are enumerations that will be presented as options during cataloging. There may be new values added or others removed from time to time to express additional distinctions to be drawn in the metadata, which is rather a different functionality to that of semantical encoding of information about :Persons or :Works.

Such a change will require updates to xmltoldmigration (and associated migrators for rKTs and so on) and to lds-queries so as to refer to the changed namespaces. I think library and ldspdi shouldn't need changes, although there may UI improvements that could be made.

eroux commented 5 years ago

It sounds reasonable, why not using the bdo: namespace directly?

xristy commented 5 years ago

after some discussion at the weekly tech meeting and just after, for now the decision is to leave things as they are and use constraints/restrictions to indicate elements that are essentially enumerated constants versus subject resources in the bdrc domain.

The conceptual clarity bought by separating constants from other elements of the ontology is currently too expensive.

We might make such a change in v2 of the ontology next year next year