- From: Mark van Assem <mark@cs.vu.nl>
- Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2005 12:06:25 +0200
- To: "Miles, AJ \(Alistair\)" <A.J.Miles@rl.ac.uk>
- CC: Charles McCathieNevile <chaals@opera.com>, public-esw-thes@w3.org
> I agree, but unfortunately I do think the aesthetics of the URIs make a difference to english speakers, especially as in almost all technical documents it's the QName that's quoted and not the label. So it's worth discussing, especially at this stage, really to flag up any potential confusion that might be avoided.
Right. And it seems to me that the discussion of the semantics of the
property is often tied up with the discussion about the name of the
property, which I think is the case here, so worth discussing.
> Btw, can I persuade you (or anyone else?) to do french/spanish/norwegian/??? labels and definitions for SKOS Core classes and properties? :)
I can do Dutch :-)
> However, practical considerations do come to bear here, and I know that as a programmer it is more convenient for me to have the labelling properties with a literal range partitioned from the labelling properties with an image resource range partitioned from the labelling properties with an audio resource range. And I wouldn't want to give up having skos:prefLabel, skos:altLabel and skos:hiddenLabel as sub-properties of rdfs:label.
I agree.
Cheers,
Mark.
--
Mark F.J. van Assem - Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
mark@cs.vu.nl - http://www.cs.vu.nl/~mark
Received on Tuesday, 5 July 2005 10:06:40 UTC