RE : RE : substitute for skos:isSubjectOf

Hi Antoine,
 
> - when you're accessing a concept, then quite often it will 
> be the subject of dozens, if not thousands, of documents. 
> Would it be natural then to provide them directly to the 
> user? It might be rather confusing, 
 
I completely agree with you that it doesn't makes sense to provide all the inverse links to dc:subject to the users (working in a library which holds more than four million items, I'm quite aware of some of the possible consequences ...) You are right in pointing out the asymmetry of the former subject/isSubjectOf pair. 
 
> and having this "direction" mediated by a query 
> (and some more complex interface machinery that would 
> go with it) seems to me more adequate.

That's what I was trying to attain: The property in question should guide the user/crawler to a result set page. (This result set page seen as a resource, with all the underlaying machinery hidden). It would act as a aggregation of items, which in turn have the concept from which I started as a dc:subject. It's a triangle relation:
 
concept -> (??:???) -> result_set_page -> (ore:aggregates, maybe) -> item -> (dc:subject) -> concept
 
The ever-changing result page, with it's generally limited size, is not so interesting as a resource in itself. But it bundles the items (maybe thousands, if it provides a xhtml:next navigation) the user is interested in.
 
All this figured out (that an inverseOf dc:subject doesn't fit well), I even more feel the requirement to express the ??:??? relation explicitly. But how could this be achieved?
 
Ciao, Joachim