Re: pls keep Concepts and documents disjoint

Dave Reynolds writes:

> 
> Actually use of fragment identifiers doesn't necessarily require you
> to put the whole thesaurus at a single URL. For example, you could
> use an arbitrary fragment ID to reinforce that you are referring to a
> concept rather than a document describing the concept but still put
> each concept definition at a separate base URL:
> 
>     http://my.org/knowlegebase/chemistry/water#concept
>     http://my.org/knowlegebase/chemistry/ice#concept
> or
>     http://my.org/knowlegebase/chemistry/water#Water
>     http://my.org/knowlegebase/chemistry/ice#Ice

This is true. On the other hand, it's not clear to me what advantage
<http://example.com/58#concept> has over <http://example.com/58>.

This is one of the Great Unresolved Issues of RDF, so it's probably best
for SKOS to be neutral. On the other hand, there are quite a few extant
vocabularies that don't use fragment IDs, e.g. FOAF and Dublin Core.
-- 
David Menendez <zednenem@psualum.com> <http://www.eyrie.org/~zednenem/>