- From: Miles, AJ \(Alistair\) <A.J.Miles@rl.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2007 19:34:07 -0000
- To: "Alasdair Gray" <agray@dcs.gla.ac.uk>, "Antoine Isaac" <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
- Cc: <public-esw-thes@w3.org>, <public-swd-wg@w3.org>
Hi Alasdair, > It is funny the way these things work, but this issue is now > starting to appear within the work on developing vocabularies > for astronomy [1]. > > My interpretation of the fact that there is development of a > skos mapping vocabulary, which has been further confirmed by > Antoine's email, is that the semantic relationships defined > in the skos core [2] are to be used only for relationships > between concepts in the same scheme. > However, this is not explicitly stated in the text of the skos core. > Will this be changed in the next version of the skos core? We don't know yet, it's under discussion. Do you have any preference? > A question I would like to raise is how can I specify a > mapping between a collection in one vocabulary and a concept > in another? It really is the collection as a whole that > matches the concept. However, the collection becomes an > anonymous node in the rdf. Is it the case that each member of > the collection should be specified as a narrowMatch of the concept? It'd be great if you could give us some more detail on this particular requirement, e.g. the actual concepts you want to map between. Cheers, Alistair. -- Alistair Miles Research Associate Science and Technology Facilities Council Rutherford Appleton Laboratory Harwell Science and Innovation Campus Didcot Oxfordshire OX11 0QX United Kingdom Web: http://purl.org/net/aliman Email: a.j.miles@rl.ac.uk Tel: +44 (0)1235 445440
Received on Wednesday, 12 December 2007 19:43:35 UTC