RE: [SKOS] ISSUE-83 semantics of scheme containment properties

If this can help, I think that
> ex:cs skos:hasTopConcept ex:c.
> entails
> ex:c skos:inScheme ex:cs
is enough... because technically we do not gain any new information by
entering a new property such "skos:topConceptInScheme "... We can just
extract all topConcept with a query.
 
hope this helps
Margherita

 -----Original Message----- 
 From: public-swd-wg-request@w3.org on behalf of Antoine Isaac 
 Sent: Sat 7/26/2008 00:44 
 To: Alistair Miles 
 Cc: public-swd-wg@w3.org 
 Subject: Re: [SKOS] ISSUE-83 semantics of scheme containment
properties
 
 


 Hi Alistair,
 
 I agree that the first solution you propose makes the trick from a
 semantic perspective. But I don't like having an extra vocabulary
 element just for this...
 
 I had actually written [1] to look a bit like the general entailments
of
 the SKOS Reference, thinking that we could  just have:
 > ex:cs skos:hasTopConcept ex:c.
 > entails
 > ex:c skos:inScheme ex:cs
 >  
 
 Otherwise I think you can indeed introduce a non-named property in an
 OWL axiom, like (hoping I'm not making any mistake...)
 
 skos:hasTopconcept rdfs:subPropertyOf [ a owl:ObjectProperty;
 owl:inverseOf skos:inScheme .] .
 
 Again, I would definitively favor one of these two options over
 introducing a new property.
 
 Cheers,
 
 Antoine
 
 [1]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008May/0068.html
 
 
 > Hi Antoine,
 >
 > I'm just trying to figure out how to implement the resolution [1]
to
 > issue 83 [2] in the SKOS reference.
 >
 > The most obvious way is to introduce a new property, called
something
 > like skos:topConceptInScheme, and introduce two new statements into
the
 > SKOS data model, that skos:topConceptInScheme is a sub-property of
 > skos:inScheme, and that skos:topConceptInScheme is the inverse of
 > skos:hasTopConcept.
 >
 > Another way would be to avoid introducing any new properties, and
to
 > include a new statement in the data model, something like, "the
inverse
 > of skos:hasTopConcept is a sub-property of skos:inScheme", or "if a
 > scheme has a top concept, then the top concept is in that scheme",
 > or ... ?
 >
 > At the moment I favour the first approach. It has an obvious
meaning in
 > terms of RDFS/OWL. The second approach has no obvious translation
in
 > RDFS/OWL, and is difficult to word.
 >
 > What do you think?
 >
 > Cheers,
 >
 > Al.
 >
 > [1]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008May/0068.html
 > [2] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/83
 >
 >

Received on Sunday, 27 July 2008 12:07:20 UTC