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

Re: furthed SKOS question

From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 00:46:32 -0400
Message-ID: <29af5e2d0809292146pbe6acbajbf173b49faa000fc@mail.gmail.com>
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
There is a proposal for how to annotate any axiom, including annotations, in
OWL 2. I have a professional interest in getting an opinion on whether that
would serve the purpose you need. The documentation is available at:
http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Syntax#Annotations
In principle you should be able to use this to say anything about an
annotation such as a label, including which concept scheme it is a preferred
label for. Of course this would need some adjustment of the SKOS schema.

Regards,

Alan Ruttenberg
co-chair OWL working group ;-)




On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 4:56 AM, Sini, Margherita (KCEW) <
Margherita.Sini@fao.org> wrote:

>
> (sorry corrected mistake)
>
>
>        If a concept is reused across different concept schemes my proposal
> would be to have different namespace (and so different URI) for it and then
> define them with the different labels as needed, and then use mappings.
>
>        E.g.
>                uri c_in_a = http://myschemeA#c123 <http://myschemea/#c123>
> and has preferred label a
>                uri c_in_b = http://myschemeB#c123 <http://myschemeB#c123>
> and has preferred label b
>
>        http://myschemeA#c123 <http://myschemea/#c123>  exactMatch
> http://myschemeB#c123 <http://myschemeB#c123>
>
>        Hope this helps.
>
>
>                -----Or iginal Message-----
>                From: public-esw-thes-request@w3.org on behalf of De Smedt
> Johan
>                Sent: Mon 9/29/2008 09:48
>                To: Rob Tice; public-esw-thes@w3.org
>                Cc:
>                Subject: RE: furthed SKOS question
>
>
>
>
>                Hi Rob,
>
>                In our projects we have recognized the need to have
> different
> labels
>                depending on the product/audience where a concept is used.
>                To solve that, we using mapping relationships.
>                Each product further uses only one specific Concept scheme
> but can
>                exploit mapped concepts
>                - when clear for the audience (to navigate/use a different
> thesaurus
>                - find indexed/classified documents (classification by the
> other concept
>                scheme terms)
>
>                Currently we have found the skos mappings to be responding
> to
> different
>                requirements though than what we need (at least as I
> understand it and I
>                appologize up front if I am wrong).  So we use a proprietary
> mapping
>                construct (it was introduced on this mailing lists in other
> comments I
>                made).
>
>                We also tried some label-relationship approach but this
> became too
>                complicated in maintenance, conformance to the standard,
> clarity and
>                complexity.
>
>                I am looking forward to your or other reactions and
> approaches about
>                this issue.
>
>                kr, Johan De Smedt.
>                e-mail: johan.de-smedt@tenfroce.com
>                ===================
>                -----Original Message-----
>                From: public-esw-thes-request@w3.org
>                [mailto:public-esw-thes-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Rob
> Tice
>                Sent: Monday, 29 September, 2008 09:12
>                To: public-esw-thes@w3.org
>                Subject: furthed SKOS question
>
>
>                Dear list members
>
>                As a follow up to my previous post (but in a slightly
> different area)
>
>                If a concept is reused across different concept schemes.
>
>                How should we expose that scheme 'a' has a preferred label
> for the
>                concept of 'a', but scheme 'b' has a preferred label for
> concept 'a'
>                which is actually 'b'?
>
>
>
>                Best Regards
>
>                Rob
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>                Rob Tice, Director
>                Knowledge Integration Ltd
>                35 Paradise Street
>                Sheffield
>                South Yorkshire
>                S3 8PZ
>                email: rob.tice@k-int.com
>                Tel: +44 (0)870 803 4661
>                http://www.k-int.com <http://www.k-int.com/>
>
>
>                No virus found in this outgoing message.
>                Checked by AVG.
>                Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 270.7.4/1695 - Release
> Date:
>                27/09/2008
>                13:11
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 30 September 2008 04:47:15 GMT

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