- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2004 12:55:13 -0400
- To: "Miles, AJ (Alistair) " <A.J.Miles@rl.ac.uk>
- Cc: "'public-esw-thes@w3.org'" <public-esw-thes@w3.org>
* Miles, AJ (Alistair) <A.J.Miles@rl.ac.uk> [2004-08-04 17:27+0100] > > Thanks, this identifies a discomfort I've had w/ interactions between > > 'top concept' notion and thesaurus mixing. At heart you're saying > > 'top concept' is a relation between a a scheme/dataset/thesaurus and > > a concept. Makes sense to me. > > > > So would this be: > > > > <owl:FunctionalProperty > > rdf:about="http:///....../skos/core#hasTopConcept"/> > > > > ie. anything that has a skos:hasTopConcept has only one such thing? > > > > Thanks Dan. > > The original idea was that a scheme has several skos:hasTopConcept > properties, pointing to the top level concepts for that scheme (i.e. so not > functional). > > If we made skos:hasTopConcept functional, each scheme would have to be > defined with a single root concept ... do you think it's worth doing it that > way? Ah, righto. I was reading too much into 'top'. Yeah seems more useful to have several, otherwise they'll all just be thing/entity/object/resource etc... I'm not 100% clear on the use case for this construct, I guess. Dan
Received on Wednesday, 4 August 2004 12:55:13 UTC