For several feature attributes and classes in INSPIRE application schemas, commonly used properties and classes from existing RDF vocabularies should be reused. Whenever the semantic of such a property matches that of a feature attribute, the existing property should be used instead. The same applies for classes. This requires review to ensure that the use of items from other vocabularies is appropriate.
Example: prov:generatedAtTime / prov:invalidatedAtTime from PROV-O are good candidates for beginLifespanVersion / endLifespanVersion from the INSPIRE application schemas.
We should identify vocabularies that are suited to represent specific elements of INSPIRE application schemas in RDF.
NOTE1: The following vocabularies are potential candidates: FOAF, SKOS, DCAT, VoID, ORG, CUBE, SSN, PROV-O, ISA core
NOTE2: This issue is different to the issues RDF types for base types from ISO 19103 (#9, #10, #11) and RDF types and properties for INSPIRE foundation schemas (#12): here we are concerned about finding suitable matches for types and properties that are defined by the INSPIRE schemas themselves, not by the schemas that are imported by the INSPIRE schemas.
Also, it is not entirely clear if direct reuse of external vocabularies is preferable to an explicit alignment, for example via subClassOf or equivalentClass axioms.
NOTE3: Ideally, the chosen methodology would be flexible regarding which particular vocabulary to reuse for the representation of a given INSPIRE application schema element (class or property), especially when considering the future evolution of INSPIRE RDF schema. In the future, it may be desirable to replace certain external vocabularies with more appropriate ones. The methodology should support this.
Description
For several feature attributes and classes in INSPIRE application schemas, commonly used properties and classes from existing RDF vocabularies should be reused. Whenever the semantic of such a property matches that of a feature attribute, the existing property should be used instead. The same applies for classes. This requires review to ensure that the use of items from other vocabularies is appropriate.
We should identify vocabularies that are suited to represent specific elements of INSPIRE application schemas in RDF.
NOTE1: The following vocabularies are potential candidates: FOAF, SKOS, DCAT, VoID, ORG, CUBE, SSN, PROV-O, ISA core
NOTE2: This issue is different to the issues RDF types for base types from ISO 19103 (#9, #10, #11) and RDF types and properties for INSPIRE foundation schemas (#12): here we are concerned about finding suitable matches for types and properties that are defined by the INSPIRE schemas themselves, not by the schemas that are imported by the INSPIRE schemas.
Also, it is not entirely clear if direct reuse of external vocabularies is preferable to an explicit alignment, for example via subClassOf or equivalentClass axioms.
NOTE3: Ideally, the chosen methodology would be flexible regarding which particular vocabulary to reuse for the representation of a given INSPIRE application schema element (class or property), especially when considering the future evolution of INSPIRE RDF schema. In the future, it may be desirable to replace certain external vocabularies with more appropriate ones. The methodology should support this.