RE: revisions and change in skos

What we have done is that we have versioned the full scheme:
 
- scheme "AGRIS/CARIS Classification scheme"
- scheme "AGRIS/CARIS Classification scheme (from 1975 to 1080) - Deprecated"
 
They can have different concepts, defined differently.
 
Hope this helps
Margherita

 -----Original Message----- 
 From: public-esw-thes-request@w3.org on behalf of De Smedt Johan 
 Sent: Mon 9/29/2008 11:26 
 To: Aida Slavic; De Smedt Johan 
 Cc: Rob Tice; public-esw-thes@w3.org 
 Subject: RE: revisions and change in skos
 
 


 Hi,
 
 I agree concepts do not die.
 
 In some historic applications though you want to use the concept
scheme
 as a navigation structure.
 So to know what concepts are applicable at a given time, you create
 versions of them as I explained.
 
 So indeed you want to know old and depricated concepts (and labels).
 However, the application requirement we have is to be able to provide
a
 concept scheme as it was on a specific time.
 
 I do not consider this to be in contradiction with the standard.
 
 Hope this clarifies our use.
 
 kr, Johan De Smedt.
 ===================
 -----Original Message-----
 From: public-esw-thes-request@w3.org
 [mailto:public-esw-thes-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Aida Slavic
 Sent: Monday, 29 September, 2008 11:14
 To: De Smedt Johan
 Cc: Rob Tice; public-esw-thes@w3.org
 Subject: Re: revisions and change in skos
 
 
 Johan,
 
 What is a 'version concept'? I am not sure is it only a casual use of
 the expression 'concept' instead of 'term' that causes problem - but
it
 may be worth to be more precise...
 
  > - URI are forever
  > - the skos:Concept may be constraind in time using an
applicability
 > period  > - the skos Concept has a creation date. modification date
 and  > version(=introduction version) property  > - semantic
relations
 are not versioned (skos would be more difficult to  > accommodate
that)
 > - Next to semantic relations, change-notes are used on versioned  >
 concepts.
  >   These change notes contain references to earlier/newr versions
of a
  > concept
 
 concept is an idea - this is the level SKOS is supposed to capture by
 assigning an URI to this idea. New concepts can emerge - semantic
field
 of on concept can split into to or two concepts can be merged to
create
 a new concept. But in principle concepts themselves don't die,
 disappear, change - so in principle URI is forever.
 For SKOS two concepts from two different KOS schemes are always two
 different concepts between which one can state the level of
similarity.
 To what degree two vocabularies speaks of the same concepts can be
 stated through alignment/mapping
 - and is defined by the mapping relationship. But even when we state
 that two concepts means the 'same/equivalent' what is meant is that
 their semantic fields overlap sufficiently for us to safely operate
with
 them as if they are the same.
 
 Labels are sphere of practical use. Relationship between concepts and
 terms
 (labels) is  one to many. In real life have to add constraints to the
 use of labels (preferred term) or change label for practical reasons.
 Labels (i.e.
 relationship between concept and label) can become depricated within
 certain sphere of use and in certain time - but this has nothing to
do
 with the concept itself.
 
 To make it more complicated - in principle in information indexing
and
 retrieval we need to preserve "the knowledge and the history of
 label/concept relationship" - simply because older recorded documents
 may have these labels used in the meaning that was relevant for the
time
 when document was created.
 Good example are geographical and geo-political entities, historical
 entities such as countries that don't exist anymore, political
entities
 that existed in certain time on which we still have documents. Then
also
 we need to know old and depricated term(s) for entities we now call
 differently in order to be able to retrieve information on them from
the
 period when they were called differently.
 
 I wonder whether my understanding here is correct - but I certainly
 don't want to distract Rob and others trying to a good job here.
 
 rgds
 
 Aida

Received on Monday, 29 September 2008 09:39:27 UTC