OpenWEMI and LRMoo

[kcoyle]

From J Busse:

"Wouldn’t it be nice to align OpenWEMI with CIDOC LRMoo, at least in principle? In any case, one should avoid introducing axioms that are not compatible with CIDOC. Some (including me) consider CIDOC and LRMoo to be “rather fat”: If OpenWEMI is intended to provide a lightweight alternative, then OpenWEMI could be created as a minimal lightweight version of the respective CIDOC classes?"

[kcoyle]

Issue #88 has some discussion of this. #102 also mentions LRMoo.

If you look at the LRMoo diagram (below) the LRMoo classes F1, F2, F3, and F5 could be subclassed to OpenWEMI classes without violating the definitions of the latter. LRMoo classes can be defined with added constraints such as making the classes disjoint. LRMoo properties could be sub-properties of the OpenWEMI ones, with additional constraints, or LRMoo could define its own. The flexibility of RDF means that it should be easy to reuse vocabulary elements that do not have contraindicating constraints.