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

Re: exactMatch mapping property

From: Dragan Gasevic <dgasevic@sfu.ca>
Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 13:53:26 -0700
Message-ID: <010101c5566b$80727000$843857d1@MAREK00001115>
To: "Charles McCathieNevile" <charles@sidar.org>, <public-esw-thes@w3.org>

What I want to do is to define mappings between two taxonomies to improve
sreach for some web documents. Whan I have mappings between a class (A) and
a union of other classes ( B,C,D) it is OK i one direction, i.e. when one
searches for A. In that case I can get all instances annotated with B, C,
and D as well. However, when one serach for C wheather I can get him any
instances of A or not...


----- Original Message -----
From: "Charles McCathieNevile" <charles@sidar.org>
To: "Dragan Gasevic" <dgasevic@sfu.ca>; <public-esw-thes@w3.org>
Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2005 1:47 PM
Subject: Re: exactMatch mapping property

> On Wed, 11 May 2005 22:31:46 +0200, Dragan Gasevic <dgasevic@sfu.ca>
> > Thanks Charles!
> >
> > I have one more doubt - If I the concept A that has exactMatch with the
> > union of the classes B, C, and D. I wonder how I can define the oposit
> > relation, let say, between B and A (or C and A, or D and A). Maybe, I
> > say they have majorMatch, or I have to define a mapping relation for
> > pair?
> You could describe the exact match as being the union. I guess you could
> also say that B,C,D are strict subset (confusingly, I think that is like A
> is subClass of B, of C, and of D...)
> cheers
> --
> Charles McCathieNevile                      Fundacion Sidar
> charles@sidar.org   +61 409 134 136    http://www.sidar.org
Received on Wednesday, 11 May 2005 20:53:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 2 March 2016 13:32:05 UTC