namespaces

[Christopher Gutteridge]

I ran https://raw.github.com/structureddynamics/Bibliographic-Ontology-BIBO/1.3/bibo.xml.owl
through an RDF "sanity checker" I've been working on;
http://graphite.ecs.soton.ac.uk/checker/?uri=https%3A%2F%2Fraw.github.com%2Fstructureddynamics%2FBibliographic-Ontology-BIBO%2F1.3%2Fbibo.xml.owl

and it highlighted some unusual namespaces:

http://www.w3.org/2006/12/owl2-xml#
http://www.w3.org/2008/05/skos#	

These may not be correct, and we should perhaps be using:

owl:	http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#
skos:	http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#

Although it's not a very big deal.

-- 
Christopher Gutteridge -- http://users.ecs.soton.ac.uk/cjg

University of Southampton Open Data Service: http://data.southampton.ac.uk/
You should read the ECS Web Team blog: http://blogs.ecs.soton.ac.uk/webteam/

My line-manager has bet me I can't get 10,000 views on my Minecraft 
YouTube video before the end of December. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PNPgaLKFlc

[Frederick Giasson]

Hi!

Yes, good catch. These are coming from the time when SKOS was thinking changing their URI, but changed their mind :)

I agree that they should be modified, so if you could, push the change on BIBO GitHub, otherwise I can do this myself if you don't have any GitHub account.

Thanks,


Fred

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Bibliographic Ontology Specification Group" group.
To post to this group, send email to bibliographic-ontolog...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bibliographic-ontology-spec...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bibliographic-ontology-specification-group?hl=en.

[Jan Polowinski]

Should this be considered for change, maybe also the prefix for the namespace 

http://www.w3.org/2003/06/sw-vocab-status/ns.rdf 

could be changed to vs (which is stated to be the preferred prefix for it). Of course opinions vary whether prefixes matter (technically they don't) but in practice it's sometimes easier.

Jan

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Bibliographic Ontology Specification Group" group.
To post to this group, send email to bibliographic-ontolog...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bibliographic-ontology-spec...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bibliographic-ontology-specification-group?hl=en.

--

Dipl.-Medieninf. Jan Polowinski

PhD student

Technische Universität Dresden
Department of Computer Science

Software- and Multimedia-Technology

01062 Dresden

Phone: +49 351 463 38311
Mobile: +49 176 80158257
E-Mail: jan.pol...@tu-dresden.de

[Christopher Gutteridge]

Well, let me plug my in-development tool for jobbing RDF programmers:
Triple-Checker: http://graphite.ecs.soton.ac.uk/checker/

It doesn't check RDF syntax, or ontological correctness, but rather looks for the kind of dumb typos which I make every now and then;
- typo'd namespace
- wrong namespace (I keep using owl:seeAlso when I mean rdfs:seeAlso!)
- incorrect datatype -- eg. You've said "2012-02-02"^^xsd:float

[Christopher Gutteridge]

Standard prefixes save errors and confusion when people do cut-and-paste using your rdf as an exemplar.

I've submitted a pull-request with the namespace changes. Turns out the skos was correct in the xmlns:skos but not in the entity definition a few lines later!