- From: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
- Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2007 17:11:43 +0200
- To: Quentin Reul <qreul@csd.abdn.ac.uk>
- CC: SWD WG <public-swd-wg@w3.org>
Hi Quentin, > > I understood that skos:narrower and skos:broader are inverses. And I > guess my question is actually going to be covered as part of the f2f > in Amsterdam [1] in a few weeks time. My personal opinion is that > these should be transitive in a similar manner to rdfs:subClass in OWL > especially if users want to be able to get information through inference. Do you have a specific application which requires this? For the moment my personal opinion is rather not enthousiastic about transitivity, and it's grounded in some practical concerns. I guess other workgroup member will come with strong arguments for transitivity, but the more practical cases we can discuss, the better... > > Another question that comes to mind is whether SKOS is intended to be > used as stand-alone or within an ontology. As part of the project I > work on, we have used SKOS properties such as skos:definition to > define concept label in OWL ontologies. But I also can see some > applications where SKOS can be used to represent thesaurus on its own. Your sentence is unclear: do my scribblings in [1] cover this problem? Cheers, Antoine [1] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/SkosDesign/ConceptSemantics > > > Sean Bechhofer wrote: >> >> On 24 Sep 2007, at 11:41, Quentin Reul wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I have looked at different aspects of SKOS and I have got a few >>> questions as a result: >>> >>> First of all, I was wondering if there was any reasoner available to >>> create a thesaurus tree and find out all the different terms that >>> are "broader/narrower" for a given term. >>> >>> My understanding is that the "broader/narrower" relationship is >>> transitive, i.e. if the user adds a term has being broader, this >>> term would have the previous term as narrower without having to add >>> the statement to the second term. >> >> Broader/narrower are intended to be *inverses*, which I think is what >> you mean here. >> >> The transitivity of broader/narrower is one of the topics that's up >> for discussion at the F2F. See "Semantic Relation Properties" in [1]. >> >> Cheers, >> >> Sean >> >> [1] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/AmsterdamAgenda >> >> -- >> Sean Bechhofer >> School of Computer Science >> University of Manchester >> sean.bechhofer@manchester.ac.uk >> http://www.cs.manchester.ac.uk/people/bechhofer >> >> >> >> >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > 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 > > >
Received on Wednesday, 26 September 2007 15:40:11 UTC