W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lld@w3.org > December 2010

Re: SemWeb terminology page

From: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2010 12:26:11 +0100
Message-ID: <4CFA2553.6050505@few.vu.nl>
To: public-lld <public-lld@w3.org>

>>> It would be odd to dismiss SKOS because we determined it was
> designed
>> to
>>> manage "concepts" rather than "controlled vocabularies".
>> I certainly wouldn't want to dismiss SKOS!  The point is that
>> SKOS organizes sets of lexical strings via underlying concepts.
> I would argue that "organizing" concepts or labels is getting into
> optional features of SKOS. Your other comments indicate you would agree.
> The essential features for authority control, in my view, are the
> ability to identify something real (a skos:Concept), associate them in a
> scheme (via skos:inScheme) and give them skos:pref/altLabels
> (potentially  "real" via skosxl:Label). Some forms of authority control
> may want to use additional gravy from SKOS, but others could just as
> well link out to other models via foaf:focus and organize from there.
> Either or both ways, SKOS can act as a schematic naming network.

I am not sure I understand everything here. But if I'm right, this discussion on (SKOS) labels illustrates the danger of using "values" for the stuff in Group 1, which we identified in our terminology chat in Cologne.
"Values" orient understanding the categories towards simple strings/labels, or reification of these (as SKOS-XL labels for instance). In a linked data environment, one should have a much more open approach to what can be used as a "reference" for producing descriptions (of books for example).

Trying to take an example we know well now :-)
http://viaf.org/viaf/24604287/#skos:Concept  may be in our Group 1
http://viaf.org/viaf/24604287/#foaf:Person may be in our Group 1
http://viaf.org/viaf/24604287/#rdaEnt:Person  may be in our Group 1
http://viaf.org/viaf/24604287/#Leonardo,+da+Vinci,+1452-1519 may be in our Group 1

There should be no assumption on the ontological nature of the "reference" resources. It really boils down to what a data publisher chooses to publish as reference set, and what a data consumer wishes to re-use.

Received on Saturday, 4 December 2010 11:25:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:27:42 UTC