search

cwrc / ontology

CWRC ontology - primary repository
13 stars 7 forks source link

Define hasWard #508

Open alliyya opened 5 years ago

alliyya commented 5 years ago

Create terms: hasWard, wardOf, ward as inverses of hasGuardian predicates.

SusanBrown commented 5 years ago

As I look at this now, I wonder if it is needed. Isn’t GuardianOf a sufficient inverse to hasGuardian? Why do we need ward also? On Aug 19, 2019, 11:33 AM -0400, Alliyya Mo notifications@github.com, wrote:

Create terms: hasWard, wardOf, ward as inverses of hasGuardian predicates.

— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/cwrc/ontology/issues/508?email_source=notifications&email_token=AAEFJIFYP4YOZGTOHWGEPPTQFK4NJA5CNFSM4INC74H2YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFUVEXG43VMWVGG33NNVSW45C7NFSM4HGAR6XA, or mute the threadhttps://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAEFJIHBFOAVJ45V5ZK2VLTQFK4NJANCNFSM4INC74HQ.

alliyya commented 5 years ago

Because we would need a context centric predicate for the contexts. guardianOf would work for the simple triples but not the complex.

For consistency sake I say it's better to create it and then we can create equivalence relationships between the two predicates.

note: hasWard == guardianOf wardOf == hasGuardian

but ward != guardian for the contexts