W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-esw@w3.org > May 2004

FW: URI policy for thesaurus concepts

From: Stella Dextre Clarke <sdclarke@lukehouse.demon.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 3 May 2004 10:40:23 +0100
To: <public-esw@w3.org>
Message-ID: <002e01c430f2$a8296300$0402a8c0@DELL>

While I agree with the desirability of enabling all these browse options
(and also the option of downloading a whole thesaurus *only*
occasionally) I don't follow the last para below, which seems to suggest
that one term may at the same time be a preferred term for one concept
and a non-preferred term for another. If the thesaurus conforms with ISO
2788, then each term must be unique, whether preferred or non-preferred.
If two concepts in the same thesaurus could be described by the same
natural-language word, then thesaurus terms may be concocted by adding
qualifiers in parentheses, e.g. "bridges (electrical)" "bridges (roads)"
"bridges (teeth)" etc. Any of these could be made either a preferred
term or a non-preferred term, depending on the needs. But other forms of
controlled vocabulary do not always follow the same rule.
Stella

*****************************************************
Stella Dextre Clarke
Information Consultant
Luke House, West Hendred, Wantage, Oxon, OX12 8RR, UK
Tel: 01235-833-298
Fax: 01235-863-298
SDClarke@LukeHouse.demon.co.uk
*****************************************************



-----Original Message-----
From: public-esw-thes-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-esw-thes-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Charles
McCathieNevile
Sent: 01 May 2004 12:16
To: Leonard Will
Cc: public-esw-thes@w3.org; public-esw@w3.org
Subject: Re: URI policy for thesaurus concepts



On Sat, 1 May 2004, Leonard Will wrote:

>
>In message <byJeXABEE3kAFAa1@light.demon.co.uk> on Sat, 1 May 2004, 
>Richard Light <richard@light.demon.co.uk> wrote
>>concepts with a link to this one"), then you can browse up and down 
>>the thesaurus tree structure from the starting concept by issuing 
>>multiple requests - if that is what you wish to do.
>
>Yes, and if the browsing is being done by a human there should also be 
>provision for browsing up and down
>(1) an alphabetical list of terms, starting at any specified point,  
>and
>(2) a list of terms containing a given character string.

Being able to browse by terms, as well as by concept relationships, is
extremely important. The tools we as people have to determine whether we
really mean the same concepts are essentially words and pictures.

One thing that is intersting in implementations is being abel to see why
a certain term is not the preferred term for a concept - erhaps because
it is a preferred term for another concept, or becausee it overlaps too
much with its use as an alternative term for another concept...

Cheers

Chaals
Received on Monday, 3 May 2004 05:40:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:11:13 GMT