You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
This is an interesting modeling choice, since the standard way to describe data types with owl or rdf in general is done using datatypes such as http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#integer.
In fact, this leads to a discrepancy between EMMO and almost any other ontology, which does hinder the possibility to match EMMO classes and individuals to other ontologies.
EMMO uses Classes to describe data types e.g.: http://emmo.info/emmo/middle/math#EMMO_f8bd64d5_5d3e_4ad4_a46e_c30714fecb7f (Integer)
This is an interesting modeling choice, since the standard way to describe data types with owl or rdf in general is done using datatypes such as http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#integer.
In fact, this leads to a discrepancy between EMMO and almost any other ontology, which does hinder the possibility to match EMMO classes and individuals to other ontologies.
E.g.:
EMMO quantity modeling:
Any Concept (Individual) -> hasQuantityValue -> Integer (Individual) -> hasNumericalData -> xsd:integer
Why not:
Any Concept (Individual) -> hasNumericalData -> xsd:integer
Since the datatype is anyhow described by xsd:integer.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: