ISO/IEC TR 19583-24:2025

Technical
Report
ISO/IEC TR
19583-24
First edition
Information technology — Concepts
2025-02
and usage of metadata —
Part 24:
11179-3:2013 Metamodel in RDF
Technologies de l'information — Concepts et utilisation des
métadonnées —
Partie 24: Métamodèle dans RDF ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013
Reference number
© ISO/IEC 2025
All rights reserved. Unless otherwise specified, or required in the context of its implementation, no part of this publication may
be reproduced or utilized otherwise in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, or posting on
the internet or an intranet, without prior written permission. Permission can be requested from either ISO at the address below
or ISO’s member body in the country of the requester.
ISO copyright office
CP 401 • Ch. de Blandonnet 8
CH-1214 Vernier, Geneva
Phone: +41 22 749 01 11
Email: copyright@iso.org
Website: www.iso.org
Published in Switzerland
© ISO/IEC 2025 – All rights reserved
ii
Contents Page
Foreword .iv
Introduction .v
1 Scope . 1
2 Normative references . 1
3 Terms and definitions . 1
3.1 Terms and definitions of metamodel constructs .1
3.2 Terms and definitions of concepts .3
3.3 Terms and definitions of knowledge organization systems .7
4 Modeling principles and mapping conventions . 9
4.1 Guiding principles of the ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013 Metamodel in RDF .9
4.2 Use of RDF and RDF based vocabularies .9
4.3 Schema conventions .10
4.4 UML Stereotypes .11
5 Overview of ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013 Metamodel in RDF .11
5.1 Organization .11
5.2 Basic types metamodel region (ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013, 6.2) .11
5.3 Basic Classes metamodel region (ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013, 6.3). 12
5.4 Identification metamodel region (ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013, 7.2) . 13
5.5 Designation and Definition metamodel region (ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013, 7.3) .14
5.6 Registration metamodel region (ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013, 8.1) . .16
5.7 Concepts package (ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013, Clause 9) .17
5.8 Binary Relations package (ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013, Clause 10) .18
5.9 Data Description package (ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013, Clause 11).18
5.10 Elements of ISO/IEC 11179-6 . .21
Annex A (informative) Summary of differences between ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013 and ISO/IEC
11179-3:2023, ISO/IEC 11179-31:2023 and ISO/IEC 11179-32:2023 .22
Bibliography .26

© ISO/IEC 2025 – All rights reserved
iii
Foreword
ISO (the International Organization for Standardization) and IEC (the International Electrotechnical
Commission) form the specialized system for worldwide standardization. National bodies that are
members of ISO or IEC participate in the development of International Standards through technical
committees established by the respective organization to deal with particular fields of technical activity.
ISO and IEC technical committees collaborate in fields of mutual interest. Other international organizations,
governmental and non-governmental, in liaison with ISO and IEC, also take part in the work.
The procedures used to develop this document and those intended for its further maintenance are described
in the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 1. In particular, the different approval criteria needed for the different types
of document should be noted. This document was drafted in accordance with the editorial rules of the ISO/
IEC Directives, Part 2 (see www.iso.org/directives or www.iec.ch/members_experts/refdocs).
ISO and IEC draw attention to the possibility that the implementation of this document may involve the
use of (a) patent(s). ISO and IEC take no position concerning the evidence, validity or applicability of any
claimed patent rights in respect thereof. As of the date of publication of this document, ISO and IEC had not
received notice of (a) patent(s) which may be required to implement this document. However, implementers
are cautioned that this may not represent the latest information, which may be obtained from the patent
database available at www.iso.org/patents and https://patents.iec.ch. ISO and IEC shall not be held
responsible for identifying any or all such patent rights.
Any trade name used in this document is information given for the convenience of users and does not
constitute an endorsement.
For an explanation of the voluntary nature of standards, the meaning of ISO specific terms and expressions
related to conformity assessment, as well as information about ISO's adherence to the World Trade
Organization (WTO) principles in the Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) see www.iso.org/iso/foreword.html.
In the IEC, see www.iec.ch/understanding-standards.
This document was prepared by Joint Technical Committee ISO/IEC JTC 1, Information technology,
Subcommittee SC 32, Data management and interchange.
A list of all parts in the ISO/IEC 19583 series can be found on the ISO and IEC websites.
Any feedback or questions on this document should be directed to the user’s national standards
body. A complete listing of these bodies can be found at www.iso.org/members.html and
www.iec.ch/national-committees.

© ISO/IEC 2025 – All rights reserved
iv
Introduction
The ISO/IEC 11179 series on Metadata registries (MDR) addresses the semantics of data, the representation
of data, and the registration of the descriptions of that data. The semantic and representational components
are described through attributes contained in the conceptual model of a metadata registry as specified in
ISO/IEC 11179-3. ISO/IEC 11179-3 provides the basic conceptual model, including the basic attributes and
relationships, for a metadata registry.
ISO/IEC 11179-3 defines a common conceptual model, but not a physical implementation. Therefore,
the metamodel need not be physically implemented exactly as specified. However, it must be possible to
unambiguously map between the implementation and the metamodel in both directions. If implementers
can ensure such a mapping, it only partially addresses the issue of interoperability, even between registry
products that can claim the same conformance level.
ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013Metamodel in RDF addresses interoperability from multiple perspectives. It defines
a semantic and formal representation of the ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013 conceptual model based on the W3C
Resource Description Framework (RDF). This model constitutes a machine readable representation, and can
therefore be easily exchanged and explored using RDF based software tools. It can be used by implementers
as a common target model for mapping between a specific implementation and the metamodel. Hence,
implementers can use this to map against a common target model and more easily identify interoperability
issues. A formal RDF model can also be instantiated and therefore serve as a direct exchange format between
registry products.
ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013 has been withdrawn and replaced by ISO/IEC 11179-3:2023. The terms used in this
document are those defined in ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013 and ISO/IEC 11179-6:2015.
Annex A provides a summary of the differences between ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013 and its successors
ISO/IEC 11179-3:2023, ISO/IEC 11179-31:2023 and ISO/IEC 11179-32:2023.

© ISO/IEC 2025 – All rights reserved
v
Technical Report ISO/IEC TR 19583-24:2025(en)
Information technology — Concepts and usage of metadata —
Part 24:
11179-3:2013 Metamodel in RDF
1 Scope
This document specifies the structure of ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013. It defines a mapping of the
ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013 conceptual model to a formal schema representation based on the W3C Resource
Description Framework (RDF). The schema is available as a separate artefact. This document specifies the
principles and conventions that were followed to map classes, attributes, and associations of the conceptual
model to a formal RDF schema.
This document does not provide detailed explanatory details about the ISO/IEC 11179 series or RDF. For
more information, refer to References [7] to [9].
2 Normative references
The following documents are referred to in the text in such a way that some or all of their content constitutes
requirements of this document. For dated references, only the edition cited applies. For undated references,
the latest edition of the referenced document (including any amendments) applies.
1)
ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013 , Information technology — Metadata registries (MDR) — Part 3: Metamodel for
registry common facilities
3 Terms and definitions
For the purposes of this document, the terms and definitions given in ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013 and the
following apply.
ISO and IEC maintain terminological databases for use in standardization at the following addresses:
— ISO Online browsing platform: available at https:// www .iso .org/ obp
— IEC Electropedia: available at https:// www .electropedia .org/
3.1 Terms and definitions of metamodel constructs
3.1.1
class
(metamodel) description of a set of objects (3.2.1) that share the same attributes (3.1.7), operations, methods,
relationships (3.1.2), and semantics
[SOURCE: ISO/IEC ISO 11179-3:2013, 3.1.5]
1) Withdrawn and replaced by ISO/IEC 11179-3:2023, ISO/IEC 11179-30:2023, ISO/IEC 11179-31:2023 and
ISO/IEC 11179-32:2023.
© ISO/IEC 2025 – All rights reserved
3.1.2
relationship
connection among model elements
[SOURCE: ISO/IEC ISO 11179-3:2013, 3.1.15]
3.1.3
association
semantic relationship (3.1.2) between two classes (3.1.1)
[SOURCE: ISO/IEC ISO 11179-3:2013, 3.1.2]
3.1.4
association class
association (3.1.3) that is also a class (3.1.1)
Note 1 to entry: An association class not only connects a set of classes, but also defines a set of features that belong to
the association itself.
[SOURCE: ISO/IEC ISO 11179-3:2013, 3.1.3]
3.1.5
superclass
class (3.1.1) that is a generalization of one or more other classes, its subclasses (3.1.6)
[SOURCE: ISO/IEC ISO 11179-3:2013, 3.1.18]
3.1.6
subclass
class (3.1.1) that is a specialization of another class, its superclass (3.1.5)
[SOURCE: ISO/IEC ISO 11179-3:2013, 3.1.17]
3.1.7
attribute
characteristic (3.2.4) of an object (3.2.1) or set of objects
[SOURCE: ISO/IEC ISO 11179-3:2013, 3.1.4]
3.1.8
datatype
set of distinct values, characterized by properties of those values and by operations on those values
[SOURCE: ISO/IEC ISO 11179-3:2013, 3.1.9]
3.1.9
identifier
sequence of characters, capable of uniquely identifying that with which it is associated, within
a specified context
[SOURCE: ISO/IEC ISO 11179-3:2013, 3.1.11]
3.1.10
package
grouping of metadata objects that provides a namespace (3.2.13) for the grouped objects, and allows them to
be referenced as a group
[SOURCE: ISO/IEC ISO 11179-3:2013, 3.1.13]

© ISO/IEC 2025 – All rights reserved
3.1.11
metamodel region
sub-division of a package (3.1.10) used to organize metadata objects for ease of explanation
[SOURCE: ISO/IEC ISO 11179-3:2013, 3.1.12]
3.2 Terms and definitions of concepts
3.2.1
object
anything perceivable or conceivable
[SOURCE: ISO/IEC ISO 11179-3:2013, 3.2.87]
3.2.2
object class
set of ideas, abstractions or things in the real world that are identified with explicit boundaries and meaning
and whose properties and behaviour follow the same rules
[SOURCE: ISO/IEC ISO 11179-3:2013, 3.2.88]
3.2.3
property
quality common to all members of an object class (3.2.2)
[SOURCE: ISO/IEC ISO 11179-3:2013, 3.2.100]
3.2.4
characteristic
abstraction of a property (3.2.3) of an object (3.2.1) or of a set of objects
[SOURCE: ISO/IEC ISO 11179-3:2013, 3.2.14]
3.2.5
classification scheme
descriptive information for an arrangement or division of objects (3.2.1) into groups based on criteria such
as characteristics (3.2.4), which the objects have in common
[SOURCE: ISO/IEC ISO 11179-3:2013, 3.2.16]
3.2.6
concept
unit of knowledge created by a unique combination of characteristics (3.2.4)
Note 1 to entry: A concept is independent of its representation.
[SOURCE: ISO/IEC ISO 11179-3:2013, 3.2.18]
3.2.7
relation
sense in which concepts (3.2.6) may be connected, via constituent roles
[SOURCE: ISO/IEC ISO 11179-3:2013, 3.2.119]
3.2.8
concept system
set of concepts (3.2.6) structured according to the relations (3.2.7) among them
[SOURCE: ISO/IEC ISO 11179-3:2013, 3.2.19]

© ISO/IEC 2025 – All rights reserved
3.2.9
namespace
scoping mechanism used for grouping related identifiers and for avoiding naming collisions between
multiple identifiers that share the same name
3.2.10
namespace prefix
scoping identifier that is bound to a namespace
3.2.11
language
system of signs for communication, usually consisting of a vocabulary and rules
[SOURCE: ISO/IEC ISO 11179-3:2013, 3.2.68]
3.2.12
language tag
tag used to indicate the language of a text or term
3.2.13
vocabulary
body of words used in a particular language (3.2.11)
3.2.14
definition
representation of a concept (3.2.6) by a descriptive statement which serves to differentiate it from related
concepts
[SOURCE: ISO/IEC ISO 11179-3:2013, 3.2.39]
3.2.15
data
re-interpretable representation of information in a formalized manner suitable for communication,
interpretation or processing
[SOURCE: ISO/IEC ISO 11179-3:2013, 3.2.27]
3.2.16
metadata
data (3.2.15) that defines and describes other data
[SOURCE: ISO/IEC ISO 11179-3:2013, 3.2.74]
3.2.17
metadata object
object type defined by a metamodel (3.2.19)
[SOURCE: ISO/IEC ISO 11179-3:2013, 3.2.74]
3.2.18
data model
graphical and/or lexical representation of data (3.2.15), specifying their properties, structure and inter-
relationships
[SOURCE: ISO/IEC ISO 11179-3:2013, 3.2.36]
3.2.19
metamodel
model that specifies one or more other models
[SOURCE: ISO/IEC ISO 11179-3:2013, 3.2.80]

© ISO/IEC 2025 – All rights reserved
3.2.20
metamodel construct
unit of notation (3.2.21) for modeling
[SOURCE: ISO/IEC ISO 11179-3:2013, 3.2.81]
3.2.21
notation
formal syntax and associated semantics
[SOURCE: ISO/IEC ISO 11179-3:2013, 3.2.86]
3.2.22
registry
information system for registration (3.2.23)
[SOURCE: ISO/IEC ISO 11179-3:2013, 3.2.113]
3.2.23
registration
inclusion of an item in a registry (3.2.22)
[SOURCE: ISO/IEC ISO 11179-3:2013, 3.2.108]
3.2.24
registry product
particular implementation system for implementing a registry (3.2.22)
[SOURCE: ISO/IEC ISO 11179-3:2013, 3.2.117]
3.2.25
registry metamodel
metamodel (3.2.19) specifying the model for a registry (3.2.22)
[SOURCE: ISO/IEC ISO 11179-3:2013, 3.2.116]
3.2.26
metadata registry
MDR
information system for registering metadata (3.2.19)
[SOURCE: ISO/IEC ISO 11179-3:2013, 3.2.78]
3.2.27
role
specified responsibilities
[SOURCE: ISO/IEC ISO 11179-3:2013, 3.2.121]
3.2.28
typed literal
literal with a defined range of possible values
3.2.29
boolean
mathematical datatype (3.1.8) associated with two-valued logic
[SOURCE: ISO/IEC ISO 11179-3:2013, 3.2.12]

© ISO/IEC 2025 – All rights reserved
3.2.30
date
datatype (3.1.8) whose values are points in time to the resolution: year, month, day
[SOURCE: ISO/IEC ISO 11179-3:2013, 3.2.37]
3.2.31
datetime
datatype (3.1.8) whose values are points in time to the resoluteion: year, month, day, hour, minute, second,
and optionally fractions thereof
[SOURCE: ISO/IEC ISO 11179-3:2013, 3.2.38]
3.2.32
integer
mathematical datatype (3.1.8) comprising the exact integral values
[SOURCE: ISO/IEC ISO 11179-3:2013, 3.2.12]
3.2.33
string
family of datatypes (3.1.8) which represent strings of symbols from standard character-sets
[SOURCE: ISO/IEC ISO 11179-3:2013, 3.2.129]
3.2.34
syntax
relationships among characters or groups of characters, independent of their meanings or the manner of
their interpretation and use
[SOURCE: ISO/IEC 11179-5:2015, 4.32]
3.2.35
camel case
convention to combine words in a single identifier without spaces or punctuation such that each word except
the first starts with a capital letter
Note 1 to entry: See 3.2.36 for Pascal case and 3.2.37 for snake case.
3.2.36
Pascal case
convention to combine words in a single identifier without spaces or punctuation such that each word starts
with a capital letter
Note 1 to entry: See 3.2.35 for camel case and 3.2.37 for snake case.
3.2.37
snake case
convention to combine words in a single identifier such that words are separated by one underscore
character
Note 1 to entry: See 3.2.35 for camel case and 3.2.36 for Pascal case.
3.2.38
schema
framework for organizing and interpreting information
3.2.39
XML Schema
W3C (3.2.40) recommendation used to describe and validate the structure and content of XML documents
Note 1 to entry: See References [12] and [13].

© ISO/IEC 2025 – All rights reserved
3.2.40
World Wide Web Consortium
W3C
international community where Member organizations, a full-time staff, and the public work together to
develop Web standards
3.2.41
serialization format
data storage format for storing, transmitting, and reconstructing data structures or object state
3.2.42
Unicode
standard for digital representation of the characters used in writing all of the world’s languages
Note 1 to entry: See Reference [11].
3.3 Terms and definitions of knowledge organization systems
3.3.1
knowledge organization system
system used to manage and organize knowledge
3.3.2
model-theoretic semantics
formal account of the interpretations of legitimate expressions of a language
3.3.3
ontology
set of concepts (3.2.6) and categories in a subject area or domain that shows their properties and the relations
(3.2.7) between them
3.3.4
first-order (predicate) logic
FOL
formal system that allows existential (there exists) and universal (for all) statements quantifying over terms
and variables related by predicates
3.3.5
decidable, adj
has an effective procedure (algorithm) to determine if a given well-formed formula is a theorem
3.3.6
Resource Description Framework
RDF
W3C (3.2.40) standard defining a formal syntax and semantics for expressing descriptions of resources
(3.3.8) that can be represented as a directed data graph
Note 1 to entry: See Reference [7].
3.3.7
triple
syntax (3.2.34) to express descriptions of resources (3.3.8) consisting of a subject, a predicate (3.3.10), and
an object
3.3.8
resource
element from a universe of discourse denoted by an IRI (3.3.9)

© ISO/IEC 2025 – All rights reserved
3.3.9
Internationalized Resource Identifier
IRI
sequence of characters from the Unicode (3.2.42) character set
3.3.10
predicate
IRI (3.3.9) denoting a property, which itself is a resource (3.3.8) representing a binary relation
3.3.11
reification
mechanism used to represent the token of a triple (3.3.7) as a resource (3.3.8) so that it is possible to make
statements about statements
3.3.12
Terse RDF Triple Language
Turtle
concrete syntax (3.2.34) for RDF (3.3.6)
Note 1 to entry: See Reference [9].
3.3.13
RDF Schema
RDFS
data modeling vocabulary for RDF (3.3.6) data
Note 1 to entry: See Reference [8].
3.3.14
Web Ontology Language
OWL
W3C (3.2.40) recommendation defining syntax and model-theoretic semantics of a family of computational
logic-based languages used for knowledge representation
Note 1 to entry: See Reference [6].
3.3.15
OWL class
representation of a concept (class intension) associated with a set of individuals (class extension)
3.3.16
OWL object property
relationship between pairs of individuals
3.3.17
functional property
OWL object property (3.3.16) indicating a functional relationship between two predicates (3.3.10)
3.3.18
inverse property
OWL object property (3.3.16) indicating an inverse relationship between two predicates (3.3.10)
3.3.19
profile
sub-language defined by a syntactic restriction of the Web Ontology Language that offers advantages in
particular application scenarios, in particular trade-offs between expressive power and computational
benefits
© ISO/IEC 2025 – All rights reserved
3.3.20
Simple Knowledge Organization System
SKOS
RDF (3.3.6) vocabulary for representing semi-formal knowledge organization systems (3.3.1) such as thesauri,
RDFS domain, classification schemes (3.2.5) and subject headings lists
Note 1 to entry: See Reference [10].
4 Modeling principles and mapping conventions
4.1 Guiding principles of the ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013 Metamodel in RDF
The goal of ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013 Metamodel in RDF is to provide a complete and faithful mapping of all
classes, attributes, and associations of the ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013 conceptual model to a formal schema
based on the Resource Description Framework (RDF). The principles and conventions for this mapping are
predicated on a lightweight approach as explained in the following sections.
4.2 Use of RDF and RDF based vocabularies
The Resource Description Framework (RDF) defines a formal language to create first-order predicate
statements in a subject/predicate/object format, called a triple. Subjects and predicates are resources.
Objects can be either resources or typed literals. A resource is represented by an Internationalized Resource
Identifier (IRI). A typed literal consists of three elements: a Unicode string, a datatype IRI, and optionally
a language tag. The datatype abstraction is compatible with XML Schema. Any datatype definition that
conforms to this abstraction may be used in RDF. Most of the common XML Schema built-in datatypes
can be used with RDF out of the box. The RDF specification defines an abstract syntax, a formal model-
theoretic semantics, a query language, and several serialization formats for storing and exchanging RDF.
ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013 Metamodel in RDF is written in the Turtle serialization format.
The W3C RDF Schema specification defines a core data modeling vocabulary for RDF. It is itself a semantic
extension written in RDF. Using RDF Schema, it is possible to define classes, subclasses, datatypes,
properties, subproperties, and domains and ranges of properties. These are the core RDF Schema elements
that have been used in writing ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013 Metamodel in RDF. Other RDF Schema vocabulary
elements (containers, collections, reification) have not been used.
The W3C Web Ontology Language (OWL) specification defines an extensive modeling ontology that
integrates with RDF and RDF Schema. It comes in several versions and profiles, targeting different levels of
expressiveness related to reasoning, e.g. OWL 2 DL (description logic) is a decidable fragment of first-order
predicate logic (FOL). Extensive use of OWL increases expressiveness, but does so at the cost of considerable
complexity. ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013 Metamodel in RDF uses a lightweight approach by using a limited set
of OWL constructs (OWL classes, object properties, datatype properties, functional properties, inverse
properties). Users may choose to extend the schema with additional OWL constructs for implementation
purposes.
The W3C Simple Knowledge Organization System (SKOS) is an RDF based vocabulary for representing
knowledge organization systems such as thesauri, taxonomies, and classification schemes.
ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013 Metamodel in RDF uses the SKOS vocabulary with a dual purpose. First, each class,
property, and association is annotated with a SKOS definition, a SKOS preferred label, SKOS notes, and SKOS
examples taken from ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013, so that ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013 Metamodel in RDF is a fully
self-describing schema. Second, ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013 itself describes the notion of concepts and concept
schemes, which can be mapped directly to SKOS.
Table 1 shows the schema constructs from RDF, RDF Schema, OWL, and SKOS that have been used in writing
ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013 Metamodel in RDF.

© ISO/IEC 2025 – All rights reserved
Table 1 — Schema constructs
Vocabulary Schema element Description
RDF Schema rdf:type Defines the class of a resource or the datatype of a literal
rdfs:subClassOf Defines a subclass relationship between types
rdfs:domain Defines the domain type of a property
rdfs:range Defines the range type of a property
OWL owl:Class Defines a resource to be an OWL Class
owl:ObjectProperty Defines a property to be an object property
owl:DatatypeProperty Defines a property to be a datatype property
owl:FunctionalProperty Defines a property to be functional
owl:inverseOf Defines a property to be the inverse of another property
SKOS skos:definition Specifies the definition of a schema element
skos:prefLabel Specifies the preferred label of a schema element
skos:note Specifies a note about a schema element
skos:example Specifies an example of a schema element
4.3 Schema conventions
The following conventions have been used for mapping the ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013 model elements to RDF.
Every model element of ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013 is represented in RDF using an IRI with the namespace https://
standards .iso .org/ iso -iec/ tr/ 19583/ -24// ed -1/ en/ and is abbreviated with the namespace prefix iso-11179.
Every class of ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013 is represented by an OWL class, mapping snake case identifiers to Pascal
case identifiers, for example the Data_Element class in ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013 is mapped to the resource
identifier iso-11179:DataElement. The same applies to association classes defined by ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013.
Basic types defined in ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013, 6.2 are either mapped to existing rdfs:Datatype instances (for
example xsd:string) or are mapped to new rdfs:Datatype instances (for example iso-11179:Text).
Every attribute and relationship defined by ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013 maps to an RDF predicate, and is therefore
represented by an IRI.
Attributes with a basic type are represented by RDF datatype properties with a domain referencing
an owl:Class and a range referencing an rdfs:Datatype. The domain class corresponds to the attribute’s
ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013 class. The range datatype corresponds to the attribute’s ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013
datatype.
Attributes of other types are represented by RDF object properties with a domain and a range referencing
an owl:Class. The domain class corresponds to the attribute’s ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013 class. The range class
corresponds to the attribute’s ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013 datatype.
Associations defined by ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013 are represented by two RDF object properties, one for each
role using the verb form of the role. Both RDF object properties reference each other with an owl:inverseOf
relationship. The domain and range classes of each OWL object property correspond to the source and target
classes of the respective association roles.
Attributes and associations in ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013 are always defined within a context. In the case of
an attribute, the context is defined by the class containing the attribute. In the case of an association, the
context is defined by the classes on both ends of the association. In RDF, the basic construct is a triple in
the form of subject/predicate/object statement. Predicates and classes are orthogonal and can be defined
independently of each other. It is possible in RDF to define a predicate (object property or datatype property)
without specifying a domain or range. To preserve the context defined by ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013, every
attribute and association is mapped to a unique predicate with corresponding domain and range types. As
a consequence, same named attributes and association roles from different classes in ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013
are mapped to different predicates in RDF and therefore require distinct IRIs. For example, the classes

© ISO/IEC 2025 – All rights reserved
Datatype, Individual, Organization, Registry Specification, and Slot defined by ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013 each
have a name attribute. Rather than using a single iso-11179:name predicate, the RDF representation uses a
distinct predicate for each attribute occurrence. To ensure a unique IRI, the convention has been followed
to indicate the attribute class or association role source in the IRI and to use the commonly adopted camel
case for RDF predicates. For consistency, this convention has been followed to determine the IRI of each RDF
predicate.
— For example, iso-11179:slot.name is the IRI of the predicate representing the name attribute of the Slot
class. The domain of iso-11179:slot.name is the OWL class iso-11179:Slot. The range of iso-11179:slot.
n
...