- From: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
- Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 10:59:26 +0100
- To: Alistair Miles <a.j.miles@rl.ac.uk>
- CC: SWD WG <public-swd-wg@w3.org>, SKOS <public-esw-thes@w3.org>
Hi Alistair, Very nice summary of these problems! Some small comments, if you wish to complete your doc (not crucial in my opinion): - the need for annotating owl:Class is not obvious for me (typical thesauri in Cultural Heritage do not pretend to be ontologies). Perhaps you should link somewhere to the requirement (not mentioned in the list, because it's supposed to come with RDF nature of SKOS and OWL) that says that skos constructs shall be used in combination with OWL, especially because some applications require 'real' ontologies to be considered as SKOS concept schemes - whatever be the solution wrt. the issues on linking and annotating labels [1,2] (that is, keeping prefLabel as a datatype property or changing it to a object propery linking two resources) the problem remains, since object properties cannot be applied to owl:Concept without breaking OWL-DL validity. Cheers, Antoine [1] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/SkosDesign/RelationshipsBetweenLabels [2] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/SkosDesign/AnnotationOnLabel > > Hi all, > > I tried to illustrate some of the issues relating to SKOS and OWL DL > compatibility, see: > > http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/SkosDesign/OwlCompatibility?action=recall&rev=7 > > > ACTION: Alistair to rephrase the old issue of skos/owl-dl coexistence > and semantics [recorded in > http://www.w3.org/2007/01/22-swd-minutes.html#action08] > --done > > Cheers, > > Alistair. >
Received on Wednesday, 21 February 2007 09:59:42 UTC