W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-esw-thes@w3.org > June 2007

RE: [SKOS] ISSUE-33 "Minimal Fix" Proposal

From: Miles, AJ \(Alistair\) <A.J.Miles@rl.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 15:09:08 +0100
Message-ID: <677CE4DD24B12C4B9FA138534E29FB1D02EC07EB@exchange11.fed.cclrc.ac.uk>
To: "Antoine Isaac" <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
Cc: "SWD WG" <public-swd-wg@w3.org>, <public-esw-thes@w3.org>

Hi Antoine,

> - keeping the original grouping constructs

Yes, the vocabulary is { skos:Collection, skos:OrderedCollection, skos:member, skos:memberList }.

> - forbidding the use of skos:narrower/broader between a 
> collection and its 'more general' concept

This would lead to an inconsistency. Make inconsistent statements at your peril :)

> - relying on sophisticated algorithm to generate hierarchies 
> for grouping-aware applications

Yes and no. The fact is that a typical "systematic display" of a thesaurus or classification scheme incorporates a certain amount of "presentational" information - information about how to lay things out in 2 dimensions. I believe it should be out of scope for SKOS to convey presentational information. This means that, in order to fully convey a systematic presentation of a thesaurus or classification scheme, you might need something other than SKOS.

However, in the absence of any presentational information, there could be a default method of constructing a systematic display. To handle SKOS grouping constructs, this would require an algorithm which is *fairly* sophisticated - certainly not straightforward to a novice hacker. The onus is on me to provide a reference implementation :)

> - asking thesaurus builders to create explicit 
> broader/narrower links between the concept generalizing the 
> collection and the concepts included in the collection (e.g. 
> ex:milk skos:narrower ex:cowmilk), 

Yes.

> therefore ignoring the 
> level of the grouping in the explicitation of the conceptual hierarchy

I'm not sure what you mean by this.

> PS: what are the 3 bars (|||) in the entailment rule table in 
> the wiki page?

Doh. That is actual three letter "l"s - it's supposed to stand for any URI reference or blank node id, like "uuu" or "vvv" - I chose "l" for "list", although I should've looked more closely at <http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-mt/#rules>, and I should've realised arial is a bad font for "l"s :) I'll change asap.
 
Cheers,

Al.


> > Hi all,
> >
> > I propose the following section of the SKOS Semantics wiki 
> draft as resolution of ISSUE-33 "Grouping Constructs" [1]:
> >
> > 
> <http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/SKOS/Semantics/Grouping?action=rec
> > all&rev=2>
> >
> > This section implements the "Minimal Fix" proposal [2], 
> with a few additional axiomatic triples to make explicit the 
> OWL typing of properties and the disjointness of 
> skos:Collection and skos:ConceptScheme.
> >
> > Note that this section does not address the issue of 
> constructing a systematic hierarchical display, but delegates 
> this responsibility to the SKOS Primer. Note also that the 
> SKOS Primer section on grouping constructs is yet to be done, 
> and that in particular I have not met Antoine's concerns 
> below regarding nested collections.
> >
> > However, I suggest we accept this resolution for now 
> (because it does fix the actual issue), and raise a new issue 
> regarding the representation and construction of systematic 
> hierarchical displays.
> >
> > ACTION: Alistair to propose minimal fix for resolution of issue 33 
> > [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/05/22-swd-minutes.html#action09]
> >
> > --done
> >
> > ACTION: Alistair to propose resolution for Issue-33 (minimal fix) 
> > [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/06/12-swd-minutes.html#action12]
> >
> > --done
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Alistair.
> >
> > [1] <http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/33>
> > [2] 
> > 
> <http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/SkosDesign/GroupingConstructs/Prop
> > osalOne?action=recall&rev=8>
> >
> > --
> > 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
> >
> >   
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: public-swd-wg-request@w3.org
> >> [mailto:public-swd-wg-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Antoine Isaac
> >> Sent: 22 May 2007 17:32
> >> To: Miles, AJ (Alistair)
> >> Cc: SWD WG; public-esw-thes@w3.org
> >> Subject: Re: [SKOS] ISSUE-33 "Minimal Fix" Proposal
> >>
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I still wonder whether something should be added to [1] to fully 
> >> convince me. I've looked at the intuitive description of the 
> >> algorithm that is presented in there to insert nodes in the 
> >> hierarchy, and it is really unclear about how it should deal with 
> >> nested node labels. Indeed I'm pretty sure that the current 
> >> description fails at giving a good strategy for them...
> >>
> >> I would propose that the proposal gives an idea about how 
> to insert 
> >> node labels in the hierarchy when we have situations as complex as:
> >> -----
> >> Styles and Periods
> >>    <styles and periods by region>
> >>        <The Islamic World>
> >>            Saracenic
> >>            pre-Islamic
> >>            <Islamic World dynastic styles and periods>
> >>                 Orthodox Caliphate
> >>                 Umayyad
> >>                 Abbasid
> >> ------
> >> (taken from [2])
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >>
> >> Antoine
> >>
> >> [1]
> >> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/SkosDesign/GroupingConstruc
> >> ts/ProposalOne
> >> [2] 
> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/SkosDesign/GroupingConstructs
> >>     
> >>> Hi all,
> >>>
> >>> I've written up a possible resolution to ISSUE-33: 
> >>>       
> >> GroupingConstructs on the SWDWG wiki, see:
> >>     
> >>>       
> >> 
> <http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/SkosDesign/GroupingConstructs/Pro
> >> p
> >>     
> >>> osalOne?action=recall&rev=8>
> >>>
> >>> Note that I am not necessarily endorsing this proposal. 
> >>>       
> >> This is a proposal which attempts to fix the issue with 
> the minimum 
> >> amount of change to the current SKOS specifications.
> >> There may, however, be good reasons for making more substantial 
> >> changes, which are hinted at in the discussion.
> >> I'll try to write up some alternatives asap.
> >>     
> >>> 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
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>   
> >>>       
> >>
> >>
> >>     
> >
> >
> >   
> 
> 

--
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 Friday, 15 June 2007 14:09:55 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:38:58 GMT