W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-esw-thes@w3.org > August 2006

Re: notation/caption

From: Jakob Voss <jakob.voss@gbv.de>
Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2006 16:14:40 +0200
Message-ID: <44D89C50.9050607@gbv.de>
To: public-esw-thes@w3.org

Andy Houghton wrote:

>> For DDC numbers I use <skos:prefLabel xml:lang="art"> so
>
> I don't remember writing the above, but if I did it was an oversight.
> From the Dewey editors perspective, the preferred label for a DDC
> concept is the class number, not the caption or indexing terms
> associated with the concept.
>
> For example:
>
> <skos:Concept>
>  <skos:prefLabel>700</skos:prefLabel>
>  <skos:altLabel xml:lang="de">Künste und Unterhaltung</skos:altLabel>
>  <skos:altLabel xml:lang="en">Arts & recreation</skos:altLabel>
>  ...
> </skos:Concept>

You're right using skos:prefLabel for notations but for the user there
is a difference between a notation (artificial code) and a linguistic
label (readable words) - I think we should include this distinction in
SKOS and xml:lang="art" fits the needs, so notations should *always* be
expressed with xml:lang="art".

On captions I'm not quite sure if they should be treated in a special
way or just as skos:altLabel. I used rdfs:label but maybe we don't need
this distinction between captions and additional labels.


> One has to realize that the focus of SKOS from the beginning was from
> a thesaurus perspective, not a subject heading or classification
> perspective. As such, I don't expect that it has to accommodate
> everything that other controlled vocabularies need.  Just having a
> framework architecture for controlled vocabularies is useful and SKOS
> provides just that.  For things like synthesized numbers, which are
> classification specific, it is not inconsistent to use or define other
> namespaces to fill that need. SKOS already takes this view with its
> mapping namespace "smap:".

The limited view to thesauri is only because of historical reasons.
Maybe synthesized numbers are too special for SKOS Core but coordination
and facets should definitely be included. Mapping is also only a first
draft that needs some developement. I hope that a revisited SKOS Core as
we will finish it in early 2008 according to
http://www.w3.org/2006/07/swdwg-charter will include all basic
components "for expressing the basic structure and content of concept
schemes such as thesauri, classification schemes, subject heading lists,
taxonomies, 'folksonomies', other types of controlled vocabulary, and
also concept schemes embedded in glossaries and terminologies" [SKOS
Core Guide]. I bet that if most real-world thesauri and classifications
can be expressed in SKOS that folksonomies, authority files etc. will be
easy.

Aida Slavic wrote:

> In Jakob's paper both caption and notation are skos:prefLabel as if botj caption and notation are
> the same indexing term - only expressed in two different languages: artificial and natural -
> which is not the case.

You got me wrong. I use <skos:prefLabel xml:lang="art"> for notations
and skos:prefLabel with xml:lang not equal to "art" *or* rdfs:label for
captions depending on if captions are unique or not (the latter will be
the case in large classifications but smaller ones also have captions
that allow you to unambigously identify the class).

Thanks for the comments you send me by private mail - I included most of
them at the Wiki page, see
http://esw.w3.org/topic/SkosDev/ClassificationPubGuide?action=info

Greetings,
Jakob
Received on Tuesday, 8 August 2006 14:15:06 GMT

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