On 14 May 2012 18:26, Antoine Isaac <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Thanks a lot for forwarding this discussion here!
> It seems to me that you are quite in agreement.
> schemaorg:domain and schemaorg:range have "labels" that I'm not fond of, but
> at least now we have well-identified properties (ie with their own URIs,
> distinct from the RDFS domain and range ones) with agreed definitions.
> @Dan: do you think Bernard's semi-formal definition could make their way
> into http://schema.org/docs/datamodel.html?
Yes - something in that direction ought to go in there. I've a bit of
a todo list already on related themes, so will prioritise some other
things first - getting the OWL up to date, getting per-property pages
etc., but it won't be forgotten!