Difference Erlangen and "official" CIDOC RDFS

[Patrick Bos]

I'm translating an existing relational database to RDF (using R2RML) and want to use CIDOC, but cannot decide whether I should use ECRM or the "official" RDFS scheme provided on the CIDOC page (e.g. http://www.cidoc-crm.org/rdfs/cidoc_crm_v6.2-draft-2015August.rdfs). Could you offer any advice? What are the differences (if any)? What are pros and cons? Is one more actively being developed than the other? Is one more up to date than the other?

[Vladimir Alexiev]

I think that ECRM is always kept up to date.

ECRM has inverse & symmetric axioms (which are not controversial), and transitive axioms (which are largely non-controversial), and restrictions (e.g. Right must have at least one Owner), which are a bit controversial.

1.5 years ago the official namespace was SPARQL & Turtle 1.0 unfriendly, since it had dots in class and property names. That’s fixed now.

As much as I like ECRM (and have contributed to it), I’d use the official RDFS namespace: in a spirit of reconciliation etc.

 

Good luck with your project!

 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Erlangen CRM" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to erlangen-crm...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to erlang...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/erlangen-crm.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.