W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-esw-thes@w3.org > January 2014

RE: identity of SKOSXL labels

From: Armando Stellato <stellato@info.uniroma2.it>
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2014 12:27:18 +0100
To: <vladimir.alexiev@ontotext.com>
Cc: <public-esw-thes@w3.org>
Message-ID: <038d01cf1052$6b9e4190$42dac4b0$@info.uniroma2.it>
Dear Vladimir,
Thanks a lot for your feedback and experience report.
Regarding "when creating a new label", I think we will setup an option to have the check for existing labels (and prompt the user to reuse them, only if a match is found), only in case a user is interested in that shared scenario.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Vladimir Alexiev [mailto:vladimir.alexiev@ontotext.com]
> Sent: Thursday, January 9, 2014 8:13 PM
> To: 'Armando Stellato'
> Cc: public-esw-thes@w3.org
> Subject: RE: identity of SKOSXL labels
> Hi Armando!
> > there is no enforcement by SKOSXL and it's a modeler's choice.
> Yes, and I can see legitimate uses for both models:
> - shared Label: only when there's a logical and permanent reason why the
> two labels are the same.
>   Then the maintenance of this shared label can be easier, because it needs
> to be done only once.
> - own (copied) Label: this is the usual case. Use when the literals are
> *incidentally* the same but may become different in the future
>   It also makes the referential management of labels more difficult: if you
> delete a concept, you need to refcount before you can delete its labels.
> SKOS editors should enforce neither model. But could they support both?
> - When creating a new label, I think it's a stretch to ask the user "reuse a
> shared label?": just create an own one
> - RDF-native editors (like VocBench) may receive a SKOS file with shared
> labels... In that case I think keeping them shared is best.
> ----
> I am not aware of any actual SKOS thesaurus using shared labels.
> But here's a related example:
> Getty has a peculiar internal organization:
> literals are shared between *languages*
> Lookie at the first 3 "Terms" here:
> http://www.getty.edu/vow/AATFullDisplay?find=rhyta&logic=AND&note=&
> english=N&prev_page=1&subjectid=300198841
> the string "rhyta" is actually shared between the languages en (English), el-
> Latn (Greek transliterated) and es (Spanish) in their database
> But of course when mapped to skos-xl, we had to unshare. Lookie here:
> http://getty.ontotext.com/resource/aat/300198841
> Those 3 terms are mapped to different skosxl:Label nodes:
>   skosxl:prefLabel aat_term:1000198841-en, aat_term:1000198841-el-Latn;
>   skosxl:altLabel aat_term:1000198841-es
> Aye?
> PS: this is still under development, we know there are omissions and
> buggies.
> Eg skosxl:prefLabel  are dumbed down to skos:prefLabel but skosxl:altLabel
> aren't
Received on Monday, 13 January 2014 11:27:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 2 March 2016 13:32:19 UTC