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

ISSUE-179: Last Call Comment: PFWG: Lexical Labels

From: SWD Issue Tracker <dean+cgi@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2008 09:53:43 +0000 (UTC)
To: public-swd-wg@w3.org,public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org
Message-Id: <20081008095343.2EBA41535DB@plopper.w3.org>

ISSUE-179: Last Call Comment: PFWG: Lexical Labels


Raised by: Alistair Miles
On product: SKOS

Raised by Al Gilman on behalf of PFWG in [1]:

Re Section 5. Lexical Labels

The motivation for the Integrity Conditions listed in section 5.4.  
(S13 and S14) is not clear.  They appear to be overly constraining  
and badly aligned with the architecture of distributed systems, where  
labels could come from different sources and authors, and where  
redundancies may arise.  Why is it okay to have no preferred label  
defined, but it is a clash to have the same string as preferred and  
alternate label?

A SKOS application should be able to deal with situations where there  
are competing preferred labels, or one label being redundantly  
defined as “preferred” and “alternate”.  These situations should not  
make the SKOS application fail.

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Oct/0063.html
Received on Wednesday, 8 October 2008 09:54:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:07:54 UTC