Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Can vocab terms of type rdf:Property be easily included in the generated HTML property list? #473

Open
pmcb55 opened this issue Sep 20, 2021 · 1 comment

Comments

@pmcb55
Copy link
Contributor

pmcb55 commented Sep 20, 2021

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
Vocabularies defining properties of RDF type rdf:Property don't appear in the generated HTML list of properties (i.e., only property terms typed as owl:ObjectProperty appear). I'm not sure if this might require an update to LODE (hopefully not!).

Describe the solution you'd like
Vocabularies defining properties of RDF type rdf:Property appear in the generated HTML list of properties.

Describe alternatives you've considered
If you control a vocabulary, you can manually add owl:ObjectProperty types to your properties, but this seems a bit unwieldy if you don't use OWL much at all, and can't be done for vocabs you don't control.

Additional context
Allows Widoco document simple vocabs based only on RDF and RDFS (and not necessarily using OWL at all).

@pmcb55 pmcb55 changed the title Can vocab terms of type rdf:Property be easily added to generated HTML property list? Can vocab terms of type rdf:Property be easily included in the generated HTML property list? Sep 20, 2021
@dgarijo
Copy link
Owner

dgarijo commented Sep 21, 2021

Hi @pmcb55,
I tried a while back to add full support for schema.org vocabs (see #449), but it didn't work out pretty well, and it needs more digging. Unfortunately all this always requires modifying the LODE template, which is not very maintainable

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants