W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-esw-thes@w3.org > January 2011

Re: Ordering concepts in a Tree display

From: Joseph Tennis <jtennis@uw.edu>
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2011 16:32:34 +0000
To: "public-esw-thes@w3.org" <public-esw-thes@w3.org>
Message-ID: <9B7F2788-E327-485A-8974-C52041A2D3E0@uw.edu>
This is what expressive notation in classification was for.   Thus, even with complex classes like: 

J381,4;4;0c7:5;3:7;5.4411.e50c’N67‘el

•Agriculture - J
•Rice Plant - 381
•Stem - 4
•Disease - 4
•Virulence - 0c7
•Prevention - 5
•Chemicals - 3
•Distribution - 7
•Sprayer - 5
•Madras - 4411
•Cauveri Delta - e50c
•1967 - N67
•Dry Period - el

We had devised it so that it fit both hierarchically and systematically in it's "proper" place.

The reason we cared so much about notation was just for this sort of "mechanized arrangement" as Ranganathan would call it.  He also developed principles from the 1930s-1970s on which orders the designer of a scheme for classification should privilege, the last of which was alphabetical order.  He thought any systematic order was better for classification than alphabetical order, which was to be used as a last resort.  I know you wanted practical advise, and not a history lecture, but I am often delighted with the two are one.  The more things change, the more they stay the same. :-)

The best weekend to all of you!
joe



Joseph Tennis
Assistant Professor
The Information School
University of Washington
Reviews Editor, Knowledge Organization

jtennis@uw.edu

faculty.washington.edu/jtennis

On Jan 14, 2011, at 8:09 AM, Mike Collett wrote:

> We use a sortkey
> eg <zthes:termNote label="sortKey">13</zthes:termNote>
> 
> We have found that this has been mostly OK as a single key within a concept
> scheme (vocabulary) and we can manage different sortkeys for different
> concept schemes.
> 
> By default we display alphabetically by the preferred label of the user's
> preferred language (set by browser or computer settings) if it exists, if
> not then in English if it exists, if not then by the first preferred label.
> 
> Some polyhierarchies need to have a concept in a different order in
> different parts of the tree. Then the relationship needs to hold the
> sortkey.
> 
> In Zthes type encoding this is easy
> eg
> <relation>
> <relationType>BT</relationType>
> <termId>xyz:1234</termId>
> <termSortkey>13</termSortkey>
> </relation>
> 
> Not sure how to do this in SKOS.
> 
> The effect could be
> Vehicles
> NT (sortkey 1) Single wheeled vehicles
> NT (sortkey 2) Bicycles
> NT (sortkey 3) Tricycles
> NT (sortkey 4) Four wheeled vehicles
> NT (sortkey 5) Vehicles with more than 4 wheels..
> 
> Popular vehicles
> NT (sortkey 1) Cars
> NT (sortkey 2) Motorbikes
> NT (sortkey 3) Bicycles
> NT (sortkey 4) Skateboards
> 
> With Bicycles needing two different sortkeys.
> 
> Cheers
> Mike 7:-D
> -----------
> Mike Collett
> Vocabulary Management Group
> +44 7798 728 747
> ------------
> www.vocman.com
> mike@vocman.com
> 
> 
> 
>> From: Christophe Dupriez <christophe.dupriez@destin.be>
>> Organization: DESTIN inc. SSEB
>> Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2011 12:56:08 +0100
>> To: <public-esw-thes@w3.org>
>> Subject: Ordering concepts in a Tree display
>> Resent-From: <public-esw-thes@w3.org>
>> Resent-Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2011 11:57:37 +0000
>> 
>> Happy New Year to all the Simple Knowledge Organization Systems workers!
>> 
>> Does anyone have designed a way to specify concept ordering when
>> displaying a tree of concepts?
>> 
>> Usually, alphabetical ordering is the best to display narrower concepts
>> of a given concept.
>> But sometimes (for instance, with historical period), there is "natural"
>> ordering of concepts which is much better.
>> I would like to add a field with the ordering criteria (stronger than
>> the prefLabel in the user language).
>> 
>> Anyone has done something for this so I do not reinvent the wheel:
>> 
>> Vehicles
>> NT Single wheeled vehicles
>> NT Bicycles
>> NT Tricycles
>> NT Four wheeled vehicles
>> NT Vehicles with more than 4 wheels...
>> 
>> Wishing you a very nice w.e. !
>> 
>> Christophe
>> 
> 
> 
> 
Received on Sunday, 16 January 2011 21:09:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 2 March 2016 13:32:14 UTC