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
Transformation rule D.05. Enumeration items — in core ontology layer says Specify SKOS concept instantiation axiom for each UML enumeration item.
The example in said rule shows :itemA a skos:Concept ; skos:inScheme :EnumerationName ; ... .
Implying that itemA is a first-class citizen of its namespace.
As opposed to attributes and association role names, no provision is made for the reuse of enumeration items so there's a serious risk of conflicting concepts in the namespace. I doubt whether "standard" should become a standalone or shared concept.
The eProcurement model shows this enumeration.
Proposed solution:
I suggest that the enumeration items be mapped by postfixing the name of the item to the owning Enumeration like so:
epo:legal_regime.light -> epo:legal_regime_light (note that I changed light_regime to light to avoid duplication)
epo:legal_regime.design-contest -> epo:legal_regime_contest (prefer _ to -)
Last but not least, the definition of the enumeration items are stored in the "initial value" field, To be consistent, these should be stored as Notes.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Initial value fields should map to sh:defaultvalue. Imho such a transformation rule is currently missing and probably best allocated to an application profile.
Transformation rule D.05. Enumeration items — in core ontology layer says Specify SKOS concept instantiation axiom for each UML enumeration item.
The example in said rule shows
:itemA a skos:Concept ; skos:inScheme :EnumerationName ; ... .
Implying that itemA is a first-class citizen of its namespace.
As opposed to attributes and association role names, no provision is made for the reuse of enumeration items so there's a serious risk of conflicting concepts in the namespace. I doubt whether "standard" should become a standalone or shared concept.
The eProcurement model shows this enumeration.
Proposed solution:
I suggest that the enumeration items be mapped by postfixing the name of the item to the owning Enumeration like so:
Last but not least, the definition of the enumeration items are stored in the "initial value" field, To be consistent, these should be stored as Notes.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: