W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-esw-thes@w3.org > January 2008

Re: AW: AW: [SKOS] Transitive broader and ISSUE-56 (was The return of ISSUE-44 )

From: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 13:29:13 +0100
Message-ID: <478B5599.8070104@few.vu.nl>
To: "Svensson, Lars" <l.svensson@d-nb.de>
CC: SKOS <public-esw-thes@w3.org>, SWD WG <public-swd-wg@w3.org>

Hi Lars,


>>> We could invent two new properties skos:broaderTransitive (a
>>> subproperty of skos:broader)	and skos:narrowerTransitive (a
>>> subproperty of skos:narrower) which both are declared as transitive.
>>> Could this be a solution? 
>>>
>>>       
>> Well I did not mean to coin standard properties there, but I
>> think your
>> wish technically matches what I just wrote yesterday for the editor's
>> draft of the primer :-)
>> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/SKOS/DraftPrimer (in 
>> section 4.7, the
>> very last lines of the document)
>>     
>
> Nice. Just what I intended. Is there a chance those could make it into
> the standard?
>   

I'm not sure this would be 100% safe, as multiple ways of specializing 
skos:broader can be thought of, cf ISSUE-56 [1]
And these mixes, leading to possibly confusing hierarchies for 
newcomers: consider the combination of "transitive"and "partitive" 
specializations. We can specialize skos.broader into 
skos:broaderTransitive, skos:broaderPartitive, 
skos:broaderTransitivePartitive. If we consider other axes of 
specialization (e.g. for "generic" and "instance" flavors of hierarchy) 
this would blur the picture even more...

On the other hand, given the number of reactions we had on this 
transitive aspect of broader, we might just decide to introduce only 
transitiveBroader, as an acknowledgement of the interest it gained.

Whatever, ISSUE-56 is still open, and comments are welcome!

Antoine
Received on Monday, 14 January 2008 12:29:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:38:59 GMT