Open VladimirAlexiev opened 9 years ago
I updated against the list of datatatypes and added .headings and TOC.
If "super types" are used somehow by the "unit" mapping field (eg unit=electricCurrent
), they should stay.
Could someone check the intro text on http://mappings.dbpedia.org/index.php/DBpedia_Datatypes and close this? @jimkont or @anjeve ?
There is a subClassOf for datatypes. In RDFS, an instance of rdfs:Datatype
is also a rdfs:Class
, which is why you can use it with rdfs:range
. The class interpretation of a datatype is simply its value space.
That being said, I am not sure whether "abstract" classes like length, area, mass etc. qualify as datatypes. On one hand, each one of them is definitely a subclass of rdfs:Literal
like a datatype, but they don't have any lexical space, and something like "10cm"^^:length
defeats the whole purpose of having individual units. Things like owl:real
are however treated as datatypes.
http://mappings.dbpedia.org/index.php/DBpedia_Datatypes shows a "hierarchy" of datatypes. But there's no such thing as subClassOf for datatypes. Therefore datatypes like http://mappings.dbpedia.org/index.php/Datatype:Area should be explained, because they can cause confusion. If not needed, they should be removed (and just kept as headings)
Would be nice to update this (edited 2010-2011)