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

RE: [SKOS] Amsterdam topic "Concept semantics"

From: Miles, AJ \(Alistair\) <A.J.Miles@rl.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2007 12:13:49 +0100
Message-ID: <677CE4DD24B12C4B9FA138534E29FB1D0363B721@exchange11.fed.cclrc.ac.uk>
To: "Antoine Isaac" <aisaac@few.vu.nl>, "Daniel Rubin" <rubin@med.stanford.edu>
Cc: "SWD WG" <public-swd-wg@w3.org>, <public-esw-thes@w3.org>

> I agree that keeping the "domainless-ness" of SKOS 
> labelling/documentation properties help solving a lot of 
> problem (that's solution 4 in the wiki page).
> One thing I would like to mention is that even with this 
> option we should put something related on the subject of 
> labelling/documentation of OWL classes in the current documentation.

Yes, absolutely. I had imagined that we would write a document on different design patterns for using SKOS with OWL -- where using SKOS for labelling/documentation in OWL ontologies would be one of those design patterns. We could then include this document as either a section of the SKOS Primer, or publish as a separate Note on its own.

What do you think?

Cheers,
Alistair.


> 
> Actually it was in the draft I prepared, but the 
> "wikification" caused the disappearing of the note :-(  
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2007Jun/0018.html
> makes the point that applying labelling properties to a 
> resource does not make it an instance of skos:Concept. 
> However, there could be
> confusion: all existing SKOS documentation (e.g . 
> http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#prefLabel) refers to 
> these properties as applied to instances of skos:Concept.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Antoine
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/swbp-skos-core-guide
> [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/swbp-skos-core-spec
> > +1
> >
> > Daniel
> >
> > At 08:20 AM 10/2/2007, Miles, AJ \(Alistair\) wrote:
> >> We have, as you mention, some use cases where people want 
> to use only 
> >> the labelling and documentation properties from SKOS, to add more 
> >> human-readable content to their formal (OWL) ontologies.
> >>
> >> Currently, neither the SKOS labelling properties nor the SKOS 
> >> documentation properties are declared with any domain. 
> There are no 
> >> dependencies between these properties and the skos:Concept class.
> >>
> >> I propose that we keep them like that. This would allow the SKOS 
> >> labelling properties and the SKOS documentation properties to be 
> >> treated as if they were standalone modules, and to be used 
> anywhere 
> >> in RDF or OWL, without having to worry about the semantics of the 
> >> skos:Concept class.
> >>
> >> (Maybe we could give this a name, as a design pattern for 
> using SKOS 
> >> and OWL together -- i.e. "OWL + SKOS labelling and documentation 
> >> only" or something like that?)
> >>
> >> Anyway, if we keep them like that, then we don't need to 
> consider any 
> >> of the SKOS labelling or documentation properties in our 
> discussion 
> >> of the semantics of skos:Concept. We can just focus on the 
> semantics 
> >> of skos:Concept, and design patterns for using 
> skos:Concept with OWL 
> >> classes, properties and individuals. This may simplify some of the 
> >> options at [1].
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >>
> >> Alistair.
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
Received on Wednesday, 3 October 2007 11:14:17 GMT

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