The RDF/XML and Turtle serializations do not represent the same RDF graph.

[matt-wallis]

This issue is about differences in the underlying RDF that is serialized by the two files

• essglobal-vocab.ttl
• essglobal-vocab.rdf

Example differences:

• Some differences are noted in issue essglobal-vocab.rdf uses rdf syntax URI where rdfs should be used #1.
• The turtle defines http://purl.org/essglobal/vocab/hasImpactOnCost, but the RDF/XML does not.
• The turtle defines "Vocabulary metadata" (as an owl:Ontology near the beginning of the file), but the RDF/XML does not.

These differences have been noted following a quick visual inspection: it would be very surprising not to find many more. The underlying problem is that these two serializations have not been generated from the same "abstract" RDF graph.

Possible solutions:

• The RDF graph could be modelled using one of many programming languages, and then libraries used to serialize the graph in many different formats (including RDF/XML and Turtle).
• Alternatively, the RDF graph could be maintained in just one format (say, Turtle), and then converted to any other required formats using software tools (which tools?).

[marianamalta]

Indeed.
THe Turtle has metadata for the vocabulary.

Same solution as Issue #1