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

Re: [ISSUE-77] [ISSUE-48] Re: [Dbpedia-discussion] Skos subject properties are deprecated

From: Mikael Nilsson <mikael@nilsson.name>
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 15:13:23 +0100
To: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
Cc: Bernard Vatant <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>, Peter Ansell <ansell.peter@gmail.com>, dbpedia-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net, SKOS <public-esw-thes@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1201184003.549.3.camel@daneel>


On tor, 2008-01-24 at 14:08 +0000, Richard Cyganiak wrote:
> >> B) Clarify that the domain of skos:subject is documents only, and
> >> introduce a new super-property of skos:subject that explicitly covers
> >> any resource. It could be named for example skos:category, or
> >> skos:indexedAs.
> >
> > How about dcterms:subject?
> >
> > http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-terms/#terms-subject
> 
> Like skos:subject, dcterms:subject seems to be intended for use on  
> documents, not people or cities. Hence it doesn't really meet  
> DBpedia's requirements.


What is the basis for that assertion?

Dublin Core has been very careful in using the word resource to indicate
that it is, in fact, applicable to more or less anything.

/Mikael

> 
> Richard
> 
> 
> 
> >
> >
> > It's not 100% clear to me that a new property is actually needed.
> >
> > /Mikael
> >
> >>
> >> C) Clarify that the domain of skos:subject is documents only, and
> >> leave the task of defining a property non-document resources to  
> >> others.
> >>
> >> My preference would be, in that order, B), A), C).
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Richard
> >>
> >>
> >> On 24 Jan 2008, at 12:45, Bernard Vatant wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hello all
> >>>
> >>> Some precisions before anyone gets carried away :-)
> >>> The latest SKOS draft Peter mentions is certainly the editor's draft
> >>> at
> >>> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/SKOS/reference/20080118
> >>> This is only an editor's draft and has no official status whatsoever
> >>> The skos:subject property is mentioned as "at risk", which means its
> >>> relevancy is questioned. It's not *deprecated* so far AFAIK, but
> >>> under discussion.
> >>> There are two related "open issues" on this
> >>> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/77
> >>> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/48 <http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/77
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> I take, as Antoine (Isaac), that the later is a generalization of
> >>> the former :
> >>> "The SKOS model should contain mechanisms to attach a given resource
> >>> (e.g. corresponding to a document) to a concept the resource is
> >>> about, e.g. to query for the resources described by a given  
> >>> concept."
> >>>
> >>> I think this is obvious. Otherwise what is the point of SKOS
> >>> altogether? The property skos:subject was (and still is) candidate
> >>> to support this mechanism. As has been pointed in e.g., the other
> >>> ongoing thread on dbpedia list [1], the term "subject" can appear to
> >>> be too specific in meaning to cover all cases of linking  a resource
> >>> to a concept, and strange in some borderline cases. But it's more a
> >>> question of terminology than a question of need of such a generic
> >>> property. In the referenced thread, I think the criticism should be
> >>> more interpreted as a weird construction of Wikipedia categories
> >>> (some are very weird indeed) than as a mistake in using skos:subject
> >>> in DBpedia to represent the Wikipedia categorisation.
> >>>
> >>> My take on this is that such a generic property is needed and should
> >>> not be deprecated. Since a lot of people (including dbpedia folks,
> >>> but not only) have started using skos:subject in the above quoted
> >>> very generic sense, and I think they are OK to do so, it should be
> >>> kept as is. But it should be put in best practices that whenever you
> >>> want to specify an indexing property, you define a specific
> >>> subproperty of skos:subject.
> >>>
> >>> SKOS specification should stress and explain what the *functional*
> >>> semantics of this property are, and are not. Simply to *retrieve
> >>> resources* indexed on a concept. Not to infer any specific semantics
> >>> on the indexing link. Just : "If you are interested in this concept,
> >>> here are resources dealing about it in some way". No more, no less.
> >>> If you want to be more specific, use a specific subproperty.
> >>>
> >>> Bernard
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> [1] http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_name=834575810801231916m4729f854lf34f47fe9af0a746%40mail.gmail.com&forum_name=dbpedia-discussion
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Richard Cyganiak a écrit :
> >>>> Peter,
> >>>>
> >>>> On 24 Jan 2008, at 05:41, Peter Ansell wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> I am new to this list, but in a discussion on another list we were
> >>>>> discussing the use of the skos:subject and related items,  
> >>>>> something
> >>>>> which dbpedia has invested in heavily to represent the wikipedia
> >>>>> category system.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The latest SKOS draft has deprecated these properties.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Can you give us some background on this decision? I have a hard
> >>>> time  understanding why this step was taken.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> What will dbpedia use instead?
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I don't know. Do you have any suggestions?
> >>>>
> >>>> Richard
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> -- 
> >>>
> >>> *Bernard Vatant
> >>> *Knowledge Engineering
> >>> ----------------------------------------------------
> >>> *Mondeca**
> >>> *3, cité Nollez 75018 Paris France
> >>> Web:    www.mondeca.com <http://www.mondeca.com>
> >>> ----------------------------------------------------
> >>> Tel:       +33 (0) 871 488 459
> >>> Mail:     bernard.vatant@mondeca.com <mailto:bernard.vatant@mondeca.com
> >>>>
> >>> Blog:    Leçons de Choses <http://mondeca.wordpress.com/>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> > -- 
> > <mikael@nilsson.name>
> >
> > Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose
> >
> 
> 
-- 
<mikael@nilsson.name>

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose
Received on Thursday, 24 January 2008 14:13:45 GMT

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