No subject

Sat Feb 13 19:31:10 CET 2010

"A textual comment helps clarify the meaning of RDF classes and
properties. Such in-line documentation complements the use of both
formal techniques (Ontology and rule languages) and informal (prose
documentation, examples, test cases). A variety of documentation forms
can be combined to indicate the intended meaning of the classes and
properties described in an RDF vocabulary. Since RDF vocabularies are
expressed as RDF graphs, vocabularies defined in other namespaces may
be used to provide richer documentation."

I'm aware that many in the OWL community have a different view of
vocabulary documentation, and tend to focus on the formal axiomatic
assertions as the 'real business'.

After all this, I do want to stress that if the removal of this
disjointness triple is disrupting real systems, we should treat that
as a problem and figure out a solution.



More information about the foaf-dev mailing list