W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-esw-thes@w3.org > September 2004

RE: pls keep Concepts and documents disjoint

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 11:48:39 -0400 (EDT)
To: "Miles, AJ (Alistair) " <A.J.Miles@rl.ac.uk>
Cc: "'public-esw-thes@w3.org'" <public-esw-thes@w3.org>, connolly@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.55.0409211118220.16559@homer.w3.org>

On Tue, 21 Sep 2004, Miles, AJ (Alistair)  wrote:

>> > However, I would suggest that the SKOS guide should be
>> neutral on all this
>
>... but the new SKOS Core Guide and Vocab Spec (under development) are going
>to have lots of examples, and if the rest of the world is anything like me,
>they won't read anything else but the examples.  So whatever style gets
>chosen for the examples I'm guessing is going to get copied and pasted alot.

Right...

>In the examples I prepared so far for the new vocab spec (see e.g. [1]) I
>used slash style URIs ... should I change these to hashes?  It would be nice
>to use a consistent style throughout, but that means making a choice.

Following the point you cite above, if you make a choice people are going to
copy it, not read the arcane discussion at the end. Personally I really
prefer the style http://my.org/knowlegebase/chemistry/water#concept and I
don't believe that most people will look at it if they are using the lovely
SKOS-aware tools that are coming out. If you had
http://my.org/knowlegebase/chemistry/water#prefTerm and
http://my.org/knowlegebase/chemistry/water#prefTerm-zh the syntax might make
more sense to people anyway, but I don't think it's that important.

But if you really want to be neutral you should mix stuff...

(My preference is that you don't. Based on my personal leanings in this
argument :-)

cheers

Chaals
Received on Tuesday, 21 September 2004 15:48:40 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:38:52 GMT