Kelly said:
> How about the refinement Requires?
> Term description "The described resource requires the
> referenced resource to support its function, delivery, or
> coherence of content.
Hmmmm. OK, I can see that if the referenced resource provides access to
the described resource, then it is also true that the referenced
resource supports the "delivery" of the described resource.
However, making multiple dcterms:requires statements about a resource
implies (to me!) that the described resource requires _all_ those
referenced resources, but isAvailableAt does not carry that meaning. I
accept that isn't explicit in the definition of dcterms:requires,
though, so I'm probably on shaky ground there. ;-) But I'm not entirely
convinced that all isAvailableAt relationships are dcterms:requires
relationships.
Also I think dcterms:requires expresses other "aspects" of "requirement"
that have nothing to do with access: not all dcterms:requires
relationships are isAvailableAt relationships.
I think they are two different relationships, and require different
properties to represent them.
Pete
|