RE: SKOS properties

You may like to know that ISO 2788 and BS 8723 both allow you to admit
antonyms as though they were equivalents (with relationship tagged
USE/UF) if appropriate. For example, in my own thesaurus I have an entry
"Inconsistency of indexing USE Indexing consistency" because both of
these terms are actually referring to the same underlying concept. (A
scope note might describe it  as "the degree of  consistency or
inconsistency encountered in indexing".) If you want to be more precise,
you could set it up as a special type of equivalence relationship. 
 
SKOS could choose to handle antonyms the same way, if it wishes. (*some*
antonyms, I should stress - not all examples would be suitable for this
treatment.) In an ontology, you might prefer the relationships to be
more specific.
 
Cheers
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 Quentin Reul
Sent: 26 April 2007 12:08
To: SWD Working Group
Cc: public-esw-thes@w3.org
Subject: SKOS properties


Hi all,
I was looking at the properties available as part of SKOS and realized
that there wasn't any properties to represent antonyms. However, these
are sometimes useful and present in some thesauri such as WordNet. Would
owl:disjointWith be sufficient to represent antonyms?
Thanks,
Quentin


-- 

  _____  


Quentin H. Reul
Computing Science
University of Aberdeen

+44 (0)1224 27 4485
qreul@csd.abdn.ac.uk
http://www.csd.abdn.ac.uk/~qreul <http://www.csd.abdn.ac.uk/%7Eqreul>