You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
When using the visual editor it would be great if one could use the less restrictive schema:domainIncludes and schema:rangeIncludes when describing relationships between classes. Visually, it's great to show that eg schema:author could be a relationship between a schema:Rating and a schema:Person, but as it is now, this would infer a rdfs:domain schema:Rating on schema:author which is not correct (other things than ratings can also have authors). The correct way to model it would be to model the relationship from owl:Thing to schema:Person, but then the unfamiliar reader will not understand it.
So my suggestion is to support the less restrictive properties to simply indicate that the relationship "could exist" between the instances of those two classes.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Whoever implements this: you may also want to support dcam:domainIncludes & dcam:rangeIncludes, and gist:domainIncludes & gist:rangeIncludes,
which have almost the same and the same meaning like the schema.org versions.
When using the visual editor it would be great if one could use the less restrictive schema:domainIncludes and schema:rangeIncludes when describing relationships between classes. Visually, it's great to show that eg schema:author could be a relationship between a schema:Rating and a schema:Person, but as it is now, this would infer a
rdfs:domain schema:Rating
on schema:author which is not correct (other things than ratings can also have authors). The correct way to model it would be to model the relationship from owl:Thing to schema:Person, but then the unfamiliar reader will not understand it.So my suggestion is to support the less restrictive properties to simply indicate that the relationship "could exist" between the instances of those two classes.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: