Link `domainIncludes` & `rangeIncludes` to their DC Metadata Terms versions

[hoijui]

There are these two sets using equal names, meaning the same, but neither of the two links to the other:

• schema.org (http://schema.org/):
  schema:domainIncludes & schema:rangeIncludes
• DC Metadata Terms (http://purl.org/dc/dcam/):
  dcam:domainIncludes & dcam:rangeIncludes

I would like to see owl:equivalentProperty being used to link the two. If deemed inappropriate, some other kind of reference should exist, to prevent confusion about which to use by external ontology designers.

[danbri]

I didn't know DC had copied the name. It looks like they have subtly different meanings. /cc @tombaker

[hoijui]

Side Note

The gist ontology (a minimalist upper ontology created by Semantic Arts) apparently also has the two, and they already refer to the schema.org version in a comment:

https://raw.githubusercontent.com/semanticarts/gist/develop/gistCore.ttl

e.g.:

gist:domainIncludes
	a owl:AnnotationProperty ;
	rdfs:subPropertyOf skos:scopeNote ;
	skos:definition "Relates a property to a class that is (one of) the type(s) the property is expected to be used on."^^xsd:string ;
	skos:example "The domain for the property gist:hasMember includes gist:Collection."^^xsd:string ;
	skos:prefLabel "domain includes"^^xsd:string ;
	skos:scopeNote
		"This property is used to guide the ontology user; like all annotation properties, it does not play a role in inference."^^xsd:string ,
		"This property means the same thing as the Schema.org version, which is an rdf:Property and not compliant with OWL-DL."^^xsd:string
		;
    .

gist:rangeIncludes
	a owl:AnnotationProperty ;
	rdfs:subPropertyOf skos:scopeNote ;
	skos:definition "Relates a property to a class that constitutes (one of) the expected type(s) for values of the property."^^xsd:string ;
	skos:example "The range for the property gist:isCategorizedBy includes gist:Category."^^xsd:string ;
	skos:prefLabel "range includes"^^xsd:string ;
	skos:scopeNote
		"This property is used to guide the ontology user; like all annotation properties, it does not play a role in inference."^^xsd:string ,
		"This property means the same thing as the Schema.org version, which is an rdf:Property and not compliant with OWL-DL."^^xsd:string
		;
	.

[hoijui]

I didn't know DC had copied the name. It looks like they have subtly different meanings. /cc @tombaker

This is the closest I could find for a possible, public point of contact (issue) with the DC folks, specific to this issue. Here are all their issues containing "domainIncludes"

[tombaker]

Thank you @hoijui and @danbri - I will bring this to the attention of @niklasl , co-chair of the DCMI Usage Board.

[osma]

@danbri

It looks like they have subtly different meanings

Can you elaborate? What's the difference in meaning (apart from the intended scope: schema.org vs. DCTerms properties)?

[kcoyle]

They are different in the domains and ranges defined for domainIncludes and rangeIncludes. schema's properties have domains and ranges that are defined within schema - schema.org:Class, schema.org:Text, etc. From what I can see (here) DC:rangeIncludes does not define domains and ranges of that property. So they are different.

(I do think it unwise to adopt vocabulary property names into different vocabularies but with different meanings (even if subtle). The difference in namespace is obvious to machines but we humans tend to jump to conclusions based on human-understandable text.)

[hoijui]

Over in the DC pendent of this issue, the idea was mentioned that it might make sense - in direct response to @kcoyle s explanation - to mark the schema.org version of the *Includes properties as owl:subPropertyOf the dcam versions.

Any thoughts about this here?

[hoijui]

There is an other duplicate of these two properties at DCID (DataCommons):

• dcid:domainIncludes
• dcid:rangeIncludes

Though they do not provide a description/definition, as it seems.

[github-actions[bot]]

This issue is being nudged due to inactivity.