Wholehearted agreement. Even if they're expressed in different ways by different representations of the conceptual model, if we can standardize the URI then an RDFS description and an OWL description of *the same URIs* can be used by different communities without breaking interoperability. If we get RDF*, or other declarative technological models for describing graph structures, then they too could describe the use of the URIs in their contexts.
Rob On Tue, Jul 20, 2021 at 6:03 AM George Bruseker via Crm-sig < crm-sig@ics.forth.gr> wrote: > Dear all, > > Many people try to use the CIDOC CRM in order to build sustainable, > reusable data sources and connect into a wider linked open data web. > > When they do so, they would like to easily be able to find / use the URIs > for the classes and properties that the standard declares. > > The official documentation does not include this information in a handy > way. > > Proposal for discussion: include the URIs for the classes and properties > as clickable links that resolve to the online space where they are > maintained in the word/pdf specification. > > Discuss! > > Best, > > George > _______________________________________________ > Crm-sig mailing list > Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr > http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig > -- Rob Sanderson Director for Cultural Heritage Metadata Yale University
_______________________________________________ Crm-sig mailing list Crm-sig@ics.forth.gr http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
