uncefact / spec-jsonld

Exposing the UN/CEFACT vocabulary as web semantics
https://service.unece.org/trade/uncefact/vocabulary/uncefact/
13 stars 5 forks source link

duplicate classes #56

Closed VladimirAlexiev closed 2 years ago

VladimirAlexiev commented 2 years ago

Consider these classes:

From the description it seems each is needed: one is a process, the other is the documentary result of that process. But if you check the applicable props of uncefact:Certification and their descriptions:

PREFIX rdf: <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#>
PREFIX uncefact: <https://service.unece.org/trade/uncefact/trade/uncefact/vocabulary/uncefact#>
PREFIX schema: <http://schema.org/>
PREFIX rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#>
select * {
    {?incoming schema:domainIncludes uncefact:Certification; rdfs:comment ?descr}
    union {?outgoing schema:rangeIncludes uncefact:Certification; rdfs:comment ?descr}
}
incoming descr outgoing
uncefact:assertion "An assertion, expressed as text, for this trade product certification, such as that this product is free from peanuts."
uncefact:assertionCode "A code specifying an assertion for this trade product certification, such as claims that a product is free from peanuts."
uncefact:responsibleAgency "The agency, expressed as text, responsible for this trade product certification."
uncefact:standard "The standard, expressed as text, for this trade product certification."
"A certification applicable to this trade product." uncefact:applicableCertification

It becomes clear that is also the result, not a process. Therefore the two classes must be merged.


We need to examine all classes with similar names for potential duplication.