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

Re: SKOS comment: change of namespace (ISSUE-117)

From: Frederick Giasson <fred@fgiasson.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 08:25:36 -0400
Message-id: <488DBAC0.6000507@fgiasson.com>
To: Alistair Miles <alistair.miles@zoo.ox.ac.uk>
Cc: 'Laurent LE MEUR' <Laurent.LEMEUR@afp.com>, public-swd-wg@w3.org, public-esw-thes@w3.org

Hi Alistair,


First, about the SKOS discovery engine, I do think that PTSW 
(pingthesemanticweb.com) could be a first step in that direction (at 
least a first series of URIs that use SKOS classes).


Now, about versionning: this is a question that everybody seems to 
stumble upon. Old ontologies such as SKOS and FOAF now have a problem: 
they have are getting really popular (used) and this kind of changes are 
trickier and trickier.

However, does it make sense to change the URI of all classes and 
properties because some properties and some classes changed their 
semantic? Possibly that it could make sense (still musing on that stuff) 
only to change the URI of the classes and properties that changed their 
semantics. Next question: what make sense then, to create a new 
namespace for these updated properties or to keep the old one and change 
the name of the class or property?

Also, was there issues using the DeprecatedClass and 
DeprecatedProperties to deprecate these "older" classes and properties?


However, it is probably not the definitive answer for all cases. For 
example, for the UMBEL ontology, I am thinking about proceeding that way 
for the UMBEL vocabulary, but I am still not sure if it is the way to go 
for future version of the instantiation files (the instantiation 
(subject concepts structure) of umbel).



My two cents



Take care,


Fred
Received on Monday, 28 July 2008 12:26:40 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:39:00 GMT