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

Re: revisions and change in skos

From: Aida Slavic <aida@acorweb.net>
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 12:06:56 +0100
Message-ID: <48E0B6D0.5000208@acorweb.net>
To: "Sini, Margherita (KCEW)" <Margherita.Sini@fao.org>
CC: De Smedt Johan <Johan.DeSmedt@wkb.be>, Rob Tice <rob.tice@k-int.com>, public-esw-thes@w3.org


> - scheme "AGRIS/CARIS Classification scheme"
> - scheme "AGRIS/CARIS Classification scheme (from 1975 to 1080) - Deprecated"

this is good approach when possible.

Because of the notational constraints - older schemes will have the following 
two situations/problems that can only be resolved through IDs - history of 
concept position in the scheme and history of labels  - I give examples of UDC 
but this would be similar to all classification schemes that maintained for more 
than 50-100 years and are going through necessary restructuring to follow the 
development of science:

1. change of label (depricated labels)

In 1905 concept ID*00001 introduced represented with label A

Upon restructuring of the scheme in 1975 concept ID*00001" is moved to a new 
class (different hierarchy) hence this concept gets a new id ID*00999 and it 
gets a new label X (i.e. label X replaces label A (depricated) - X label is new 
(never used before)
Relationship between ID*00001 and ID*00999 has to be established  - but also the 
relationship between labels A - X

2. re-use of once depricted labels to denote new concept

In 1990 new concept ID*01333 introduced - and label A is re-used for this new 
(label A was before used to represent concept ID*00001 which is now represented 
with label X and has ID*00999)

In practice and in real life there will be collections using A to represent 
concept 00001 (old classification schedules) and those using A to represent 
concept 01333 (new classification schedules). Three will be need in 
disambiguating A(s) and linking IDs.

I now realise that two IDs for concept that *is* and *is not* the same :-) is 
also a very good example of what Johan calls 'concept versioning' - I would only 
say that it is better to use expression 'scheme versioning'

I am aware that the management of label version may be simplified and made more 
logical and elegant - but this would be a luxury only modern schemes can afford. 
Old data and its use pose many constraints.

Received on Monday, 29 September 2008 11:07:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 2 March 2016 13:32:10 UTC