yesterday, we discussed the inverse of OBI_0001927 (obi:specifies value of), which is currently not defined. During a repeated closer look at our miro board, I noticed, that for the value specification pattern the term OBI_0001938 (obi:has value specification) is used. I changed the pattern to match that. I think I got confused by obi:has value specification and obi:has specified value, where the first is an object property while the latter is a data property.
As a result, I currently don't need the inverse relation any more. I think it's better to only define it in case we really need it, so I do not propose that change right now.
Hi @joergwa @webhart,
yesterday, we discussed the inverse of OBI_0001927 (
obi:specifies value of), which is currently not defined. During a repeated closer look at our miro board, I noticed, that for the value specification pattern the term OBI_0001938 (obi:has value specification) is used. I changed the pattern to match that. I think I got confused byobi:has value specificationandobi:has specified value, where the first is an object property while the latter is a data property.As a result, I currently don't need the inverse relation any more. I think it's better to only define it in case we really need it, so I do not propose that change right now.
See you, Matthias