W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-esw-thes@w3.org > February 2005

Re: Question on skos:subject domain

From: Dave Reynolds <der@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2005 12:02:59 +0000
Message-ID: <4219CDF3.4030404@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
To: Leonard Will <L.Will@willpowerinfo.co.uk>
CC: public-esw-thes@w3.org

Leonard Will wrote:

> In message <4219BB99.9020207@hp.com> on Mon, 21 Feb 2005, Ian Dickinson 
> <ian.dickinson@hp.com> wrote
> 
>>
>> I notice that skos:subject has a rdfs:domain of foaf:Document. 
>> Apologies if this has been discussed before, but is there a reason for 
>> this? I would have thought that resources other than documents (and 
>> indeed, FOAF's particular take on what a document is) can be 
>> classified by a SKOS concept.
> 
> 
> In the draft British Standard for thesaurus construction we have used 
> "document" with a very broad meaning, equivalent to "information 
> resource" - it is just more convenient to have one word rather than two..
> 
> That definition is given in <http://www.willpowerinfo.co.uk/glossary.htm>.

That defintion of "document" is certainly very general (it includes people, 
buildings etc).

Whilst foaf:Document is pretty generally I don't think it is supposed to be 
quite that general. For example, it would presumably be surprising to find 
something that is both a foaf:Person and a foaf:Document.

It would make sense to me to leave the domain of skos:subject undefined or 
to define a skos:Document which is as general as that defined in your glossary.

Dave
Received on Monday, 21 February 2005 12:03:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:38:53 GMT