RE: [Proposal][SKOS-Core] skos:denotes

Hi,

Although Danbri had me convinced [1], I found Dave R's argument compelling
[2].  Both points of view seem good to me, or at least appropriate under a
particular set of circumstances.

So here's an attempt to accommodate both points of view ... what if we do
the following:

(1) Add a new property 'skos:denotesSameAs' to SKOS Core, which is
*symmetric* and which carries essentially the same semantics as
skos-map:exactMatch.

(2) Add a new property 'skos:denotesClass' to SKOS Core, with domain
skos:Concept and range rdfs:Class, *as a sub-property of
skos:denotesSameAs*.

(3) Add a new property 'skos:denotesIndividual' to SKOS Core, with domain
skos:Concept and range rdf:Resource, *as a sub-property of
skos:denotesSameAs*.

So (1) establishes the underlying ontological commitment that a skos:Concept
sits at the same level of abstraction as an RDFS/OWL Class/Individual.
However, (2) and (3) allow the *directionality* of such a relationship to be
captured, where that is required.

Er, re-reading that it back to myself, it sounds potentially a little shaky,
but I'll post this anyway, and hopefully it will stimulate more ideas.

Al.

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-esw-thes/2004Sep/0067.html
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-esw-thes/2004Oct/0005.html


---
Alistair Miles
Research Associate
CCLRC - Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
Building R1 Room 1.60
Fermi Avenue
Chilton
Didcot
Oxfordshire OX11 0QX
United Kingdom
Email:        a.j.miles@rl.ac.uk
Tel: +44 (0)1235 445440



> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-esw-thes-request@w3.org
> [mailto:public-esw-thes-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Miles, AJ 
> (Alistair)
> 
> Sent: 14 October 2004 15:25
> To: 'Leo Sauermann'; public-esw-thes@w3.org
> Subject: RE: [Proposal][SKOS-Core] skos:denotes
> 
> 
> 
> Hi Leo,
> 
> To answer the easiest question first, the 'traditional' way 
> to use SKOS
> concepts is as the values in a subject-based index of 
> documents.  There is a
> proposal on the table [1] for a 'skos:subject' property, 
> which basically
> behaves in the same way to the 'dc:subject' property, i.e. 
> you will be able
> to state:
> 
> <rdf:RDF /*standard namespaces*/>
> 
>   <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://foo.com/somedoc.html">
>     <skos:subject rdf:resource="http://bar.com/some#concept"/>
>   </rdf:Description>
> 
> </rdf:RDF>
> 
> Of course, there are many other scenarios emerging in which 
> SKOS concepts
> can be used (and your use case is expanding the set I had 
> imagined so far
> :).  For example, a SKOS concept can be depicted by an image, 
> or a SKOS
> concept could be a topic of interest or expertise for a person ...
> 
> Anyway.  Another set of scenarios (including yours I think) 
> requires us to
> be able to express a relationship between a SKOS concept and 
> an RDFS/OWL
> Class/Individual that 'intends'/'represents'/'denotes' the 
> same (or similar)
> thing.  This requirement was the basis for the original 'skos:denotes'
> proposal [2] which has been argued for by danbri (see e.g. [3]).
> 
> However, others have argued that a relationship of meaning 
> between a SKOS
> concept and an RDFS/OWL Class/Individual is essentially the same as a
> mapping relationship between two SKOS concepts (see e.g. 
> [4]).  Or in other
> words, there is no difference in the level of abstraction 
> between a SKOS
> concept and an RDFS/OWL Class/Individual.  Hence a 
> 'skos:denotes' property
> is not appropriate.
> 
> So this debate is currently poised :)  
> 
> I'm just thinking, perhaps a more detailed description of 
> your requirements
> here could help us with this problem ... could you expand a 
> little on these
> for us?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Alistair.
> 
> [1] 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-esw-thes/2004Oct/0081.html
> [2] 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-esw-thes/2004Sep/0041.html
> [3] 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-esw-thes/2004Sep/0067.html
> [4] 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-esw-thes/2004Oct/0005.html
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-esw-thes-request@w3.org
> [mailto:public-esw-thes-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Leo Sauermann
> Sent: 14 October 2004 09:46
> To: public-esw-thes@w3.org
> Subject: Re: [Proposal][SKOS-Core] skos:denotes
> 
> 
> Danbri:
> 
> > RDF tries to impose some basic design constraints across 
> all projects
> > that use it, to make things easier for data-merging, extensibility
> > etc. What we're doing with skos:represents (or whatever it gets
> > called) is coming up with a little add-on that helps SKOS-based RDF
> > data work better with non-SKOS RDF data.
> 
> 
> I could not follow the whole discussion, because I began 
> thinking about skos
> a week ago
> http://leobard.twoday.net/stories/360443/
> 
> My Goal is:
> 
> I want to build stuctures that are independent of nromal RDF 
> instances, that
> means: I want to model things like "Job" 
> "Private" "ProjectX" and form these things as SKOS:Concepts
> 
> then I have emails, files, photos, websites, etc that I want 
> to add to these
> SKOS:concepts
> 
> Ideal:
> SKOS concepts
> REAL LIFE Resources
> 
> JOB
>  - Project X
>      - Meeting 23.10.2004
>  - Project Y
> Email "skos;denoites"
> File "skos image"
> Website "skos website"
> Website "http://www.w3.org/2001/sw"
> 
> 
> now I want
> <meeting 23.10.2004> <????> <http://www.w3.org/2001/sw>
> 
> 
> the problem:
> You forgot to add somehting to skos that allows to acutally USE skos.
> A thesaurus /taxonomy/  whatever is only useful when I can link it to
> external RDF resources,
> 
> All predicates in SKOS are having domain/range skos Concepts,
> but SKOS concepts are a closed thing and I want to create 
> triples from skos
> to the outer world.
> The "real" resources out there in the world are of type 
> email, file, person,
> vcard, vEvent
> 
> So, please,
> tell me which property I have to use to hang real resources to a SKOS
> concept.
> is this SKOS:denotes?
> 
> is it dc:hasPart ?
> 
> cheers
> Leo
>

Received on Thursday, 14 October 2004 14:49:56 UTC