Hi, > Well I'm not sure what you mean exactly by an "off-line conversion of > the ontology to SKOS", and as said above, I'm not even sure if such an > expression makes sense at all. First it sounds like you're thinking > there is a single and systematic way to convert OWL to SKOS, and I hope No, that's not what I meant. > it's not the case. Second, it would lead folks to think that SKOS and > OWL are just two languages to model the same things differently, which > IMO is plainly wrong. Actually I hope the ongoing SKOS standardization The problem you are having is twofold: 1- two different ways to model the world (backoffice/front: one in terms of stars, another in terms of hotel quality) 2- two different languages to describe domain models (OWL/SKOS: one as a formal class hierarchy, another in loose broader/narrower hierarchy) I am suggesting that problem 1 has nothing to do with problem 2; they are orthogonal. To solve problem 1, you need domain specific rules to convert information from one domain model to the other (from stars to quality). You can: - specify rules in some programming language that convert at runtime - specify rules in RDF that get interpreted at runtime To solve problem 2 you probably can use some static rules but like you suggest might need some specific ones like you seem to be doing (relating a SKOS concept to specific classes, instances,...) With my "offline" remark I was suggesting that whatever solutions to 1 and 2 you have in place now, you can do the conversions from the OWL data (backend) to the SKOS model (frontend) at "design time" (e.g. once a day on your server), not at "runtime" (e.g. each time a query about a Hotel comes in). Hope I'm still making sense... Mark. -- Mark F.J. van Assem - Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam markREMOVE@cs.vu.nl - http://www.cs.vu.nl/~markReceived on Friday, 3 November 2006 09:17:07 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:11:21 GMT