RE: [PORT] Subject Indicators

Hi Steve,

> 
> I haven't had time to study the SKOS spec yet, but I
> know that you have a property for subjectIndicator in
> there.
> 
> I just want to give you a heads-up that my current
> thinking is that having a special property may not be
> the optimal way of adding subject indicators (and hence
> Published Subjects) to RDF. I am tending toward the idea
> that a *class* defining the concept of "information
> resource" (as a subclass of "resource") may be a better
> way to go.

Am most interested to hear your ideas on this.

Without knowing any more detail about your current thinking than what you
said above: the idea of defining the class of 'information resources' sounds
like a good idea ... but that doesn't address the issue of how to identify
non-inforesources.  Do you think it is OK to allocate URIs directly to
non-inforesources?  Or do you think we should always identify
non-inforesources indirectly (e.g. as described in [1])?  

Yours,

Al.

[1] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/webarch/#indirect-identification

> 
> This is of course one of the issues that needs to be
> addressed in RDFTM but I thought I'd let you know now
> in case your deadlines for SKOS require us to try and
> get that discussion going immediately.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Steve
> 
> --
> Steve Pepper <pepper@ontopia.net>
> Chief Strategy Officer, Ontopia
> Convenor, ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 34/WG 3
> Editor, XTM (XML Topic Maps 1.0)
>  
>

Received on Monday, 15 November 2004 17:43:29 UTC