desise format for vocabularies

Baptiste Cecconi ceccobapts at yahoo.fr
Mon Oct 14 21:11:35 CEST 2024


Hi guys, 

just to let you know that the rest of the semantic world is doing this "deprecation" in a similar way, using OWL (Web Ontology Language).

Actually, it can be done in two different ways, which are logically equivalent:
- the term has type "owl:DeprecatedClass"
- the term has a "owl:deprecated" property, which is must be set to "true" (with a xsd:boolean type)

I would tend to try and adopt the generic semantics way of doing things. 

Setting the "deprecated" property to "true" (boolean true) makes things clear and obvious. No need to read the documentation to understand what it means.

Cheers
Baptiste 

> Le 4 oct. 2024 à 09:42, Mark Taylor via semantics <semantics at ivoa.net> a écrit :
> 
> On Fri, 4 Oct 2024, Markus Demleitner via semantics wrote:
> 
>> Hi Mark,
>> 
>> On Thu, Oct 03, 2024 at 09:40:23AM +0100, Mark Taylor wrote:
>>>> As the deprecated key is string typed then is
>>>> 
>>>>  “deprecated” : null
>>>> 
>>>> also a true value?
>>> 
>>> I'd say yes; though the VocInVO text "present and mapped to a reserved value"
>>> seems a bit obscure here.
>> 
>> Now that you expose it like that, it *does* seem somewhat obscure.
>> What I meant to say was "do not look at the value" (and hence, yes,
>> null as a value would count; I'd even consider this a good choice.
>> Let me sidestep the question of "undefined", as I prefer to hope that
>> has not made it into JSON).
>> 
>> Perhaps "present and mapped to an arbitrary value"?
> 
> Yes that would be better.  I wouldn't say that an erratum is required
> here, but if there's a later version is should be reworded.
> 
> --
> Mark Taylor  Astronomical Programmer  Physics, Bristol University, UK
> m.b.taylor at bristol.ac.uk          https://www.star.bristol.ac.uk/mbt/



More information about the semantics mailing list