Re: conceptGroups in iso-thes

Hi Johan,

Now I understand that I can manage all my ConceptGroups in the same way. 
The only difference is that, for the Microthesaurus type, I can 
specialize the skos:inScheme property with a iso-thes:microThesaurusOf 
property. Isn't it ?
The "Correspondence between ISO 25964 and SKOS/SKOS ‐ XL Models" 
document was not so clear : the comment suggested that on one hand, 
there was an iso-thes:ConceptGroup (untyped) with a typed property 
(iso-thes:microThesaurusOf) and on the other hand, a subclass of 
iso-thes:conceptGroup (typed) with an untyped property (skos:inScheme), 
so a double differentiation in treatment :-)

Thanks a lot for this clarification,
kb


-------- Message original --------
Sujet: Re: conceptGroups in iso-thes
De : Johan De Smedt <johan.de-smedt@tenforce.com>
Pour : katell.briatte@culture.gouv.fr
Copie à : public-esw-thes@w3.org
Date : Jeudi 17 Octobre 2013 13:20:06
>
> Hi Katell,
>
> Managing all concept groups in the same way is possible (unless I 
> miss-understood your remark).
>
> However, ConceptGroups and ConceptScheme are disjoint (in RDF and OWL 
> semantics).
>
> 1) According ISO 25964, concept groups are NOT Thesaurus ‘like’.
>
>     Therefore, they are not modeled sub-classes of the class 
> skos:ConceptScheme.
>
>     In general one can imagine that “some” concept groups (like 
> Micro-Thesaurus) are thesaurus ‘like’ but not all concept groups have 
> that similarity.
>
> 2) ISO 25964 does not formally give a classification (or sub-typing) 
> of concept groups.
>
>    Typing is done via a literal property: giving examples like 
> "microthesaurus", "theme", or "subject category"
>
>     So ISO 25864 does not formally specify what a micro-thesaurus is – 
> giving some freedom to thesaurus managers.
>
> 3) In the ISO 25964 – SKOS correspondance 
> <http://www.niso.org/schemas/iso25964/correspondencesSKOS/> document 
> [1], the microthesaurus is modeled as an iso-thes:ConceptGroup (also a 
> skos:Collection), like any other concept group.
>
>      In general, skos:inScheme is adviced to be used on all modeled 
> entities  (concept, group, array).
>
>      In addition, one specific and one custom specialization are advised:
>
>     a) the iso-thes specific specialization allows formalizing the 
> “MicroThesaurus” typing by means of the property 
> iso-thes:microThesaurusOf which is a sub-property of skos:inScheme.
>
>     b) the advised custom specialization is to make a thesaurus 
> specific sub-class of iso-thes:ConceptGroup.
>
>     examples of custom classes may be:
>
>         myScheme:Domain, myScheme:Microthesaurus, myScheme:Theme, 
> myScheme:SubjectCategory, … (as is practical and convenient)
>
> Exports of any concept group (for UNESCO or EUROVOC, Domain as well as 
> Micro-Thesaurus could be a group), should include the concept group 
> URI (e.g. myScheme:myGroupX ) and the skos:inScheme.
>
>    myScheme:myGroupX  a   skos:Collection ,   iso-thes:ConceptGroup ,  
> myScheme:MyConceptGroupType  .
>
>    myScheme:myGroupX  skos:inScheme   myScheme:myThesaurus  .
>
> In case the concept Group is a micro thesaurus, the following 
> additional statement should be made:
>
>    myScheme:myGroupX  iso-thes:microThesaurusOf   myScheme:myThesaurus  .
>
> Note: In the above text, any token starting with ‘my’ (myScheme, 
> MyConceptGroupType, myGroupX, myThesaurus) is custom (not in scope of 
> skos, skos-xl or iso-thes).
>
> [1] http://www.niso.org/schemas/iso25964/correspondencesSKOS
>
> Kind Regards,
>
> *Johan De Smedt *
>
> /Chief Technology Officer/
>
> //
>
> mail: johan.de-smedt@tenforce.com <mailto:johan.de-smedt@tenforce.com>
>
> mobile: +32 477 475934
>
> mail-TenForce
>
> *From:*BRIATTE Katell [mailto:katell.briatte@culture.gouv.fr]
> *Sent:* Thursday, 17 October, 2013 11:17
> *To:* Johan De Smedt
> *Cc:* public-esw-thes@w3.org
> *Subject:* conceptGroups in iso-thes
>
> Hi Johan,
>
> I wonder why a ConceptGroup is handled differently as it is a 
> Microthesaurus or another type of grouping.Is there some inconvenience 
> in treating all the ConceptGroups in the same way, namely as 
> sub-properties of skos:ConceptScheme ?
> We are currently implementing SKOS exports with iso-thes:ConceptGroup 
> in the next release of GINCO 
> (https://github.com/culturecommunication/ginco). It would be easier 
> and more consistent to manage all groups of concepts in the same way. 
> What do you think about it?
>
> Kind regards,
> kb
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Merci de nous aider à préserver l'environnement en n'imprimant ce 
> courriel et les documents joints que si nécessaire.
>

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Merci de nous aider à préserver l'environnement en n'imprimant ce courriel et les documents joints que si nécessaire.