Reading a paper about how RDF vocab 1 cannot be mapped onto RDF vocab 2 (expressing overlapping domains) because vocab 2 is missing some classes and properties.

I'm wondering if the author is missing one of the main points of RDF, or if I'm naively assuming that mixing vocabs to gain the best of both is the usual practical solution.

Follow

One of the paper's conclusions: "we should modify vocab2 to accommodate the whole vocab1 elements so as to represent metadata in a straightforward manner in line with vocab1"

Or how about we just use vocab1's elements in conjunction with vocab2 for that subset of gaps?

· · Web · 1 · 0 · 0

@dbs which paper? ... and also YES this is absolutely the point of RDF and Vocab 2 shouldn't become an extended duplicate of Vocab 1.

Also I can't find where I asked you about making new wikidata predicates and I know you answered but maybe I didn't fave?

@platypus Hey, you have a track record of getting things done, and that's a really strong motivation to help you.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Mastodon

Server run by the main developers of the project 🐘 It is not focused on any particular niche interest - everyone is welcome as long as you follow our code of conduct!