The stages: “unstable”, “testing”, “stable” are roughly analogous to “alpha”, “beta” and “gold standard” in software development. But I grant you it’s not that clear – unfortunately there isn’t an agreed way to document changes in ontologies – I guess the SKOS stuff is close.

It doesn’t model spin off programmes and other relationships between programme brands. But other relationships are modeled OK, I think. BTW Brands are things like Waking the Dead or Heroes (what would be a ‘sub-brand’ in your mind?)

Why is the relationship between episode and programme confusing?

But you’re right may be it’s a bit confusing without examples – I’ll right another post to expand on this when I get a moment.

There’s also no explanation as to what “testing” and “unstable” mean.

I wonder if the Brand > Series > Episode is enough to cover the full spread of programmes. What about brands that have sub-brands, or spin-off brands? The relationship between “episode” and “programme” is also confusing.

In short, unless everyone else understands RDF and ontologies much better than me, we could do with more in the way of explanation and examples!