Fix hasEvent, define more rigorous subclasses of Event and Activity#22
Fix hasEvent, define more rigorous subclasses of Event and Activity#22EOltmanns wants to merge 2 commits into
Conversation
|
Thank you for this work @EOltmanns, the only thing I am wondering about splitting into a different issue is the inverse property |
|
Well, I have defined the inverse properties purely for readability's Mind you, I have been wondering whether I should have used |
This did come up in discussion a bit, not having inverse properties forces a certain direction which your queries have to take. I have never found it a real impediment when SPARQL querying Wikidata for example, which has only single direction properties.
It would be good to get on a call at some point and discuss the ramifications of adding these statements. As for another update, I have started by implementing the unionOf wrap for the eight properties with multiple domains in the source repo. Thanks again for pointing these out. |
Define the domain of hasEvent as the union rather than the intersection of Item, Manifestation and WorkVariant. Also, state explicitly whether a given event type relates to Item, Manifestation, or (/ and) WorkVariant.
State explicitly whether a given activity type relates to Item, Manifestation, or (/ and) WorkVariant.
3d50f2c to
9907a9b
Compare
|
Alright, I think I stand by my choice of Note that When not defining the inverse property explicitly, the restriction |
Please see issue #21 for the rationale behind this change set.
If the suggested approach is acceptable, please review the changed as
well as the unchanged definitions of events and activities carefully
as I am not an expert on film cataloguing rules and might well have
got the assignment to WorkVariant vs. Manifestation etc. wrong in
various cases.