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

RE: SKOS Mapping Vocabulary Specification query

From: G.hopmans <g.hopmans@mssm.nl>
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2006 23:02:50 -0000
To: "Stella Dextre Clarke" <sdclarke@lukehouse.demon.co.uk>, "'George Macgregor'" <george.macgregor@strath.ac.uk>
Cc: public-esw-thes@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1GD63m-0005Cf-Bc@da.mambo2.nl>

Hello George,
You also might consider to do some R&D on mapping with Topic Maps.
If you want to work with SKOS and Topic Maps then this blog is a starting
point:
http://www.garshol.priv.no/blog/10.html
(in the blog you will find enough other references),
or this one might help as well:
http://www.ontopia.net/topicmaps/materials/tm-vs-thesauri.html

best regards,

Gabriel


--------- Original Message --------
From: Stella Dextre Clarke <sdclarke@lukehouse.demon.co.uk>
To: 'George Macgregor' <george.macgregor@strath.ac.uk>
Cc: public-esw-thes@w3.org
Subject: RE: SKOS Mapping Vocabulary Specification query
Date: 15/08/06 20:36

>
>
> George,
>
> You may like to consider the mapping types in the forthcoming BS 8723
> Part 4. This standard will define mappings as &quot;statements of the
> relationships between the terms, notations or concepts of one vocabulary
> and those of another&quot;. It will describe the following types of
mapping:
> - equivalence (comparable to the equivalence relationship in a
> multilingual thesaurus)
> - hierarchical (comparable to the BT/NT relationship in a thesaurus)
> - associative (comparable to the RT/RT relationship in a thesaurus)
> The main emphasis in the standard is on equivalence mappings.
>
> It will describe degrees of equivalence, acknowledging that some
> proposed equivalents are partial or inexact (but may nonetheless be
> acceptable in appropriate contexts) without establishing distinct
> mapping types for the more and less exactly equivalent respectively. It
> will also suggest a method of handling one-to-many equivalences, i.e.
> where a concept in one of the vocabularies is represented by a
> combination of concepts in the other vocabulary, and for this situation
> two different combination types are described.
>
> Well, this may not be exactly what you are asking about, but we hope it
> will be useful for a lot of applications.  Let me know if you'd like to
> see a draft.
>
> All the best
> 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 George Macgregor
> Sent: 15 August 2006 15:59
> To: public-esw-thes@w3.org
> Subject: SKOS Mapping Vocabulary Specification query
>
>
>
> Dear all,
>
> At the Centre for Digital Library Research (CDLR) we are in the process
> of researching and developing a M2M mapping-based terminology server.
> This work is being undertaken via the third phase of the High-Level
> Thesaurus project (HILT) [1].  HILT III will offer web services access
> (via SOAP) and plans to use SKOS Core for wrapping terminology sets for
> sending. In particular, this would entail the use of the SKOS Mapping
> Vocabulary Specification.
>
> Previous phases of HILT indicated that a degree of specificity was
> required when characterising mapping match types.  This was necessary to
> facilitate improved results ranking and to provide users with adequate
> relevance feedback.  Vocabulary switching work conducted by Chaplan [2]
> identified 19 separate mapping match types and noted the difficulty in
> using conceptual approaches to denote equivalence.  More recently, Liang
> et al. [3] have found problems in implementing the SKOS matches for
> mapping between disparate thesauri.  This was attributed to difficulties
> pertaining to the match type definitions and their ability to
> accommodate more complex matches.
>
> Clearly there is a need to offer a simple conceptual approach to
> specifying equivalence - and this is what the SKOS MVS does; however, we
> would be keen to know the status of the SKOS MVS, whether any extensions
> are being
> proposed and, if so, their nature.   Since there has not been
> significant
> public comment on the SKOS mapping types, we would also be keen to hear
> comments and whether people consider the MVS to be sufficiently
> specific. Our current thoughts are that we might extend the SKOS MVS to
> incorporate extra match types, but we would want to do this
> collaboratively and in a way that can accommodate any foreseeable (or
> potential) additions to the SKOS MVS.
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> George
>
> References:
>
> [1] HILT: http://hilt.cdlr.strath.ac.uk/
>
> [2] Margaret A. Chaplan, Mapping Laborline Thesaurus terms to Library of
> Congress Subject Headings: implications for vocabulary switching,
> Library Quarterly 56(1) (1995) 39-61.
>
> [3] A. Liang, M. Sini, Chang Chun, Li Sijing, Lu Wenlin, He Chunpei and
> J. Keizer, The mapping schema from Chinese Agricultural Thesaurus to
> AGROVOC, 6th AOS Workshop - Thesaurus enrichment and facilitating
> interoperability through mapping (2005).  Available:
> ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/008/af241e/af241e00.pdf
>
> ----------------------------------------------
> George Macgregor,
> Centre for Digital Library Research (CDLR),
> Department of Computer &amp; Information Sciences,
> University of Strathclyde, Livingstone Tower,
> 26 Richmond Street, Glasgow, UK, G1 1XH
> tel: +44 (0)141 548 4752
> fax: +44 (0)141 548 4523
> web: http://cdlr.strath.ac.uk/
> --------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 15 August 2006 21:03:07 GMT

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