This is a handy graphical representation of common practice for OWL
ontologies:
- https://www.infowebml.ws/rdf-owl/graphical-representations.htm#rdfsClass
Almost everything in BF2 is a subclass of rdfs:Resource. In other
words, BF2 classes "sidestep" owl:Thing (for almost everything except
bf:Agent) to assert subclass relations directly on rdfs:Resource. As
this seems, to me, to be an unusual practice for an ontology (OWL
ontology), I'd like to understand the reasoning behind it. (When
developing MADSRDF, the root class is owl:Thing, so this seems to be a
departure from another LC ontology practice.)
Thanks,
Darren
--
Darren L. Weber, Ph.D.
Cognitive Scientist and Software Engineer
Digital Library Systems and Services
Stanford University Libraries
Lathrop Library
518 Memorial Way MC:3101
Stanford, CA 94305-3101
http://stanfordwho.stanford.edu/lookup?search=darren%20weber
http://www.linkedin.com/in/darrenleeweber
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4822-6661
http://github.com/darrenleeweber
http://github.com/sul-dlss
|