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

Re: [OEP] "Classes as values": comments on draft

From: Natasha Noy <noy@SMI.Stanford.EDU>
Date: Tue, 4 May 2004 10:18:43 -0700
Message-Id: <18595496-9DEF-11D8-8BD3-000A958B5C28@smi.stanford.edu>
Cc: public-swbp-wg@w3.org
To: "Miles, AJ (Alistair) " <A.J.Miles@rl.ac.uk>

Hi Alistair,

> This is an interesting question, I am not sure where I come down on 
> this.

Yes, I don't have an answer either

> An argument for using SKOS within a note like this is that it is 
> supported
> by some fairly clear and well-presented documentation on how it is 
> supposed
> to be used, which can be linked to.

exactly, and that's one argument. On the other hand, if we are trying 
to illustrate a point, such as when and how to use classes as property 
values, it may be good to limit the content of the example to things 
that are absolutely necessary to understanding the point and not have 
the reader have to wander elsewhere to look for things that don't make 
the example any clearer. Or do they? So, in this particular case, would 
referring to the SKOS vocabulary make an example more clear than using 
the local parentSubject property? What do you think?

I really don't have an answer...


PS. I do agree with Bernard though that referring to specific (or at 
least realistic book titles) is better than having individuals named 
Received on Tuesday, 4 May 2004 13:18:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:09:38 UTC