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

RE: [PORT] new editor's working draft of SKOS Core Vocab Spec

From: Stella Dextre Clarke <sdclarke@lukehouse.demon.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2005 19:35:39 +0100
To: <tiago.murakami@itau.com.br>, "'Miles, AJ \(Alistair\)'" <A.J.Miles@rl.ac.uk>
Cc: "'Dan Brickley'" <danbri@w3.org>, <public-esw-thes@w3.org>
Message-ID: <000f01c5cd00$3f4a5fa0$0300a8c0@DELL>

I share the reservations expressed by Tiago and Sue Ellen Wright. My
worry is that a jack of all trades tends to be master of none. Trying to
meet everyone's objectives with one tool may reduce the effectiveness of
the tool for the core jobs it should be designed for.

In the forthcoming BS8723, a controlled vocabulary is defined as
"prescribed list of terms or headings each one having an assigned
meaning. Controlled vocabularies are designed for use in classifying or
indexing documents and for searching them."

This definition is a bit lacking, now that I look at it again, because
it does not clarify that there should be only one term (or notation)
allowed for representing one particular concept in indexing/searching -
although this principle is fundamental to the standard types of
controlled vocabulary.

Not sure if there is a standard definition for folksonomies, but so far
as I am aware they do not seek to "control" term usage in the sense of
ensuring that everyone is guided to use the same term for the same
concept. To my mind, terminologies and glossaries are a bit different
too - for example they may allow more than one term to be used for the
same concept. So my preference would be to remove all of these from the
statement of what the SKOS Core model seeks to cover. Well, I've made
this point before and failed to persuade anyone. It's a slippery slope,
in my view...

Stella


*****************************************************
Stella Dextre Clarke
Information Consultant
Luke House, West Hendred, Wantage, Oxon, OX12 8RR, UK
Tel: 01235-833-298
Fax: 01235-863-298
SDClarke@LukeHouse.demon.co.uk
*****************************************************



-----Original Message-----
From: public-esw-thes-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-esw-thes-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of
tiago.murakami@itau.com.br
Sent: 06 October 2005 18:37
To: Miles, AJ (Alistair)
Cc: Dan Brickley; public-esw-thes@w3.org
Subject: RE: [PORT] new editor's working draft of SKOS Core Vocab Spec




Hi All,

There is a problem: Folksonomies are not a Controlled Vocabulary.

Tiago









 

                      "Miles, AJ

                      \(Alistair\)"              To:       "Dan
Brickley" <danbri@w3.org>                     
                      <A.J.Miles@rl.ac.uk        cc:
<public-esw-thes@w3.org>, <public-swbp-wg@w3.org>  
                      >                          Subject:  RE: [PORT]
new editor's working draft of SKOS Core 
                      Sent by:                    Vocab Spec

                      public-esw-thes-req

                      uest@w3.org

 

 

                      06/10/2005 14:25

 

 







Hey Dan,

>
> The negotiation is by language prefs from the browser,
> not (to be pedantic) by country, right? So a Dutch speaker
> in France can get Dutch, if they configure things properly.

Yep, depends on the 'Accept-Language:' header sent by the browser.

> One tiny edit. Instead of...
>
> "SKOS Core is a model for expressing the structure and content of 
> concept schemes (thesauri, classification schemes, subject heading 
> lists, taxonomies, terminologies, glossaries and other types of 
> controlled vocabulary)."
>
> How about
>
> "SKOS Core is a model for expressing the structure and content of 
> concept schemes (thesauri, classification schemes, subject heading 
> lists, taxonomies, 'folksonomies', terminologies, glossaries and other
> types of controlled vocabulary)."
>
> If "folksonomy" proves to become a dated buzzword, we can remove it in

> a later version. Would be good for W3C to go on record as
> asserting SKOS's
> relevant there, though. In the Guide too, and other
> occurances of this
> abstract.

I'm happy to add this.

Cheers,

Al.





Esta mensagem e uma correspondencia reservada. Se voce a recebeu por
engano, por favor desconsidere-a. 
O sistema de mensagens da Internet nao e considerado seguro ou livre de
erros. Esta instituicao nao se responsabiliza por opinioes ou
declaracoes veiculadas atraves de e-mails.
Received on Sunday, 9 October 2005 18:35:36 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:38:54 GMT