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
I expected REC was inhering The Organization Ontology for representing organization (https://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-org/, http://www.w3.org/ns/org#), but I found that REC is using isMemberOf instead of memberOf. Any reason to choose a custom one over a standard one?
In the worst case, we could introduce an alias, but I'd like to see better standard alignment and wonder your thoughts.
Thanks!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Agree, seems inconsistent. Likely just a remniscence from earlier REC naming convention (in the REC 3 series the isMemberOf was used in connection with collections).
Suggest to include proposed change in 4.1. Decision in upcoming tech steering committee meeting.
Hi there,
I expected REC was inhering The Organization Ontology for representing organization (https://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-org/, http://www.w3.org/ns/org#), but I found that REC is using isMemberOf instead of memberOf. Any reason to choose a custom one over a standard one?
In the worst case, we could introduce an alias, but I'd like to see better standard alignment and wonder your thoughts.
Thanks!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: