W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-esw-thes@w3.org > April 2018

Re: "SKOS Plus"?

From: Thomas Francart <thomas.francart@sparna.fr>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 09:21:09 +0200
Message-ID: <CAPugn7WDpngr_9gYPECfOvEpRvjrNi53kz3=MnE-ALEoxFZXuQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
Cc: SKOS <public-esw-thes@w3.org>
Hello

Some inputs from XKOS :

2018-04-22 15:30 GMT+02:00 Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>:

> Hi,
>
> The notion of a "SKOS plus" doesn't ring a bell either.
> There's XKOS that could have a similar remit, though. In fact we had some
> discussions on whether to re-use the iso-thes extension there...
>

The output of this discussion is that equivalences will be asserted between
XKOS and iso-thes. See https://github.com/linked-statistics/xkos/issues/32.


> Other areas where I could imagine similar extension principle could be in
> the area of describing Concept Schemes, in the work of the DCMI NKOS WG, or
> Bartok, and others. But I don't remember "plus" appearing in these works,
> either...
>

> Cheers,
>
> Antoine
>
>
> On 22/04/18 14:49, Thomas Baker wrote:
>
>> Hi Fabio,
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 22, 2018 at 02:04:50PM +0200, Fabio Ricci wrote:
>>
>>> 2016 I introduced “illegally” the concept of SKOS++ in
>>> https://skosshuttle.ch/tutorials/skosshuttle-skospp.pdf as you
>>> probably are trying to do now.
>>>
>>
>> Interesting - I see you defined a SKOS++ project as one that could
>> define as many custom relations as needed.
>>
>> The ideas can be copied/used at your will, since they are not legally
>>> protected.
>>>
>>
>> Understood. SKOS was always intended to be extensible [1].  The project
>> I'm describing in my paper, like many others, uses the iso-thes
>> namespace and coins some custom relation properties.  I wanted to see if
>> others have given such an "extended SKOS" pattern a name.
>>
>
XKOS defines some extensions, in particular subproperties of skos:related :
http://www.ddialliance.org/Specification/XKOS/1.0/OWL/xkos.html#overview-of-skos-and-xkos-semantic-properties
Some argues drifting towards OWL is a bad idea, we think there are
use-cases for extending SKOS relations while not moving in the OWL world :
https://github.com/linked-statistics/xkos/issues/76

Cheers
Thomas





>
>> Hope that helped
>>>
>>
>> Much appreciated!
>> Tom
>>
>> [1] https://www.w3.org/TR/2009/NOTE-skos-primer-20090818/#secsko
>> sspecialization
>>
>>
>


-- 

*Thomas Francart* -* SPARNA*
Web de *données* | Architecture de l'*information* | Accès aux
*connaissances*
blog : blog.sparna.fr, site : sparna.fr, linkedin :
fr.linkedin.com/in/thomasfrancart
tel :  +33 (0)6.71.11.25.97, skype : francartthomas
Received on Monday, 23 April 2018 07:21:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 April 2018 07:21:58 UTC