Re: "Drawing the Pictures"

Maybe even something textual like this?
"The Zthes abstract model for thesaurus representation, version 1.0"
http://zthes.z3950.org/model/zthes-model-1.0.html

--Jon

Sean Bechhofer wrote:
>
>
> In the telecon yesterday, I raised the question of whether we should
> be providing some kind of metamodel for SKOS. Just to clarify, I'm not
> necessarily calling for a formalised model with mapping rules and
> translations into the underlying RDF (as for example, we have with
> OWL). Rather, I was thinking of something (could be UML diagrams,
> could be simply blobs and lines) that tries to capture some of our
> underlying intuitions about the SKOS model. I think Elisa captured
> what I meant well when she said "drawing the pictures".
>
> I believe that would then help in pinning down what we mean by
> 'containment', 'aggregation' etc. For example, do we consider the
> relationships between concepts to be part of a scheme? Do we consider
> the concepts to be part of the scheme? Do we consider the
> relationships of a concept to be somehow part of the concept? Can
> concepts "exist" independently of a scheme? In my personal experience
> with OWL (and your mileage may of course, vary), thinking about things
> at a higher level of abstraction than the RDF triple structure made it
> easier to see what was going on and how things fit together.
>
> This certainly doesn't have to be normative, and in fact may not even
> need to form part of our final document set. I think it would benefit
> the process though. This would perhaps best be something to do in a
> F2F context (as I think was also mooted).
>
>     Sean
>
> -- 
> Sean Bechhofer
> School of Computer Science
> University of Manchester
> sean.bechhofer@manchester.ac.uk
> http://www.cs.manchester.ac.uk/people/bechhofer
>
>
>
>
>

Received on Saturday, 11 August 2007 15:59:50 UTC