W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-swd-wg@w3.org > January 2007

Re: [SKOS] structuring f2f discussion

From: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 15:21:53 +0100
Message-ID: <45AE3101.1040501@few.vu.nl>
To: Jon Phipps <jphipps@madcreek.com>
CC: Alistair Miles <a.j.miles@rl.ac.uk>, SWD WG <public-swd-wg@w3.org>


>> I would add that we will have to sort out the other types of
>> requirements, that is the ones that do not concern only the
>> representation constructs offered by SKOS. They are quite diverse, some
>> of them only vague design goals that we might not keep in the end...
> The OWL Requirements doc that we're using as a somewhat loose exemplar
> contains a "Goals" section [1], in addition to a "Use Cases" section,
> that is referenced by quite a few of the requirements:
> "Design goals describe general motivations for the language that do
> not necessarily result from any single use case. Along with the Use
> Cases, these motivate the Requirements and Objectives in Sections 4
> and 5. In this section, we describe eight design goals for the web
> ontology language..."
> It might be useful to try to identify some of the design goals of SKOS
> and its support for common patterns of thesaural representation,
> independent of actual use cases, in order to provide a foundation for
> additional requirements not raised by the use cases.


> Does some version of a list of design goals for SKOS already exist, or
> might this be a good topic for further discussion at the F2F.

Perhaps some of the vague requirements in [2], e.g. "R8. Vocabulary 
interoperability" or "R10. Extendability of SKOS model", fall in this 
category. There is actually a "ontology interoperability" goal in [1]


[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/webont-req/#section-goals

[2] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/CandidateReqList
Received on Wednesday, 17 January 2007 14:22:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:07:48 UTC