We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Modeling with subPropertyOf is unclear.
subPropertyOf
The ontology states for instance:
:hasBearsDate rdf:type owl:ObjectProperty ; rdfs:subPropertyOf :hasAppearance ;
The documentation exemplifies (link to archive bc nomisma.org is down):
:Coin_1 nmo:hasApperance [ nmo:hasBearsDate "0231"^^<xsd:gYear> ] .
So with RDF inference the data would be expanded to:
:Coin_1 nmo:hasApperance [ nmo:hasBearsDate "0231"^^<xsd:gYear> ; nmo:hasApperance "0231"^^<xsd:gYear> ] .
Is this intended? Reading the ontology I'd assume the example is wrong and it should instead be
:Coin_1 nmo:hasBearsDate "0231"^^<xsd:gYear> .
expanding to
:Coin_1 nmo:hasApperance "0231"^^<xsd:gYear> . :Coin_1 nmo:hasBearsDate "0231"^^<xsd:gYear> .
I guess either the ontology statement is wrong (don't use subPropertyOf) or the example is wrong (don't use intermediate blank nodes).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
No branches or pull requests
Modeling with
subPropertyOf
is unclear.The ontology states for instance:
The documentation exemplifies (link to archive bc nomisma.org is down):
So with RDF inference the data would be expanded to:
Is this intended? Reading the ontology I'd assume the example is wrong and it should instead be
expanding to
I guess either the ontology statement is wrong (don't use
subPropertyOf
) or the example is wrong (don't use intermediate blank nodes).The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: