On Jun 21, 2016 10:32 AM, "Tom Johnson" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> It's probably not a good idea to use rdf:value with bibframe, as the bibframe RDF convention is to use separate properties for object and data values.
> Can you say more about this Simon? Does rdf:value have special meaning w.r.t. owl:ObjectProperty/DataProperty that I'm not aware of?
The problem is that the whole namespace is that rdf: is one of the reserved vocabularies in OWL, and only explicitly listed names from the reserved vocabularies can be used in OWL 2 DL (and the fast subsets like RL, EL, and QL).
The reason for not including rdf:value is that it can take values that can be either literals or things. The best that can be done with it in a non-strict parser is to treat it as an annotation property (which makes it invisible to reasoners).
It's an inconvenient convenience property ; a pair of properties like bf:text and bf:ref would require less typing, with better Typing.