- From: Mark van Assem <mark@cs.vu.nl>
- Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 10:55:31 +0100
- To: "Miles, AJ (Alistair)" <A.J.Miles@rl.ac.uk>
- CC: "'public-esw-thes@w3.org'" <public-esw-thes@w3.org>, "Thomas Baker (E-mail)" <thomas.baker@BI.FHG.DE>
Hi Alistair,
Using the word "refinement" for extensions in terms of sub-props and
sub-classes sounds fine (i.e. not ambiguous) to me personally.
Mark.
> However I use the words 'extending' and 'extensible' as buzzwords for
> talking about SKOS Core, because this feature of RDF (i.e. 'extension' via
> sub-prop & sub-class) is a major selling point for SKOS Core. It means that
> SKOS Core can be a standard representation framework for KOS that doesn't
> break when you try to represent slightly quirky KOS. You get
> interoperability without having to sacrifice flexibility. People in the KOS
> community respond very well to this feature I have found.
>
> Not sure what to do about this to avoid the potential ambiguity Tom
> describes.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Al.
>
--
Mark F.J. van Assem - Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
mark@cs.vu.nl - http://www.cs.vu.nl/~mark
Received on Tuesday, 25 January 2005 09:55:34 UTC