W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-swd-wg@w3.org > October 2008

RE: ISSUE-130 draft response

From: Houghton,Andrew <houghtoa@oclc.org>
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2008 10:52:46 -0400
Message-ID: <6548F17059905B48B2A6F28CE3692BAA015A1E04@OAEXCH4SERVER.oa.oclc.org>
To: <public-swd-wg@w3.org>

> From: public-swd-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-swd-wg-
> request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Alistair Miles
> Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2008 10:31 AM
> To: public-swd-wg@w3.org
> Subject: ISSUE-130 draft response
> 
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> Here's a draft response to Kjetil on [ISSUE-130], let me know what you
> think. Note *this is just a draft, not the actual response* -- I'll
> wait for feedback from the WG before replying formally to
> Kjetil.
> [...]
> so it was great to see that skos:topConceptOf is in! Please keep it
> there, it
> is simply much easier for us to use it in development with the present
> architecture.

The problem with skos:hasTopConcept or skos:topConceptOf is that it does not scale.  If your vocabulary has tens of top concepts it works well, but if your vocabulary has hundreds or thousands, then listing all of them in skos:ConceptScheme is cumbersome.  It would be better for vocabularies with a large number of top concepts to indicate in skos:Concept that they are a top concept.  Thus when you retrieve a skos:Concept you also have an indication that itís a top concept rather than having to also retrieve the skos:ConceptScheme to see whether the skos:Concept is a top concept.

Andy.
Received on Wednesday, 1 October 2008 14:53:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 1 October 2008 14:53:29 GMT