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

Re: some thoughts about the OWL WG comments

From: Sean Bechhofer <sean.bechhofer@manchester.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2008 09:33:51 +0100
Message-Id: <269E1509-5305-4476-A1A0-4CF44649BBE8@manchester.ac.uk>
Cc: Alistair Miles <alistair.miles@zoo.ox.ac.uk>, Guus Schreiber <schreiber@cs.vu.nl>, SWD WG <public-swd-wg@w3.org>, Norman Gray <norman@astro.gla.ac.uk>
To: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>


On 13 Oct 2008, at 17:42, Antoine Isaac wrote:

>
> Hi Alistair,
>
> I still don't get it: we say that skos:notation works with typed  
> literal, as in [1]
>
>> This property is used to assign a notation to a concept as a typed  
>> literal [RDF-CONCEPTS <http://www.w3.org/TR/skos-reference/#ref- 
>> RDF-CONCEPTS>].
>
> But in fact for the most common case (a concept having one  
> notation), skos:notation would be used with plain literals? I'm  
> really not convinced by what we are going to propose here...

Antoine

Are you not convinced because we haven't stated it clearly enough? Or  
not convinced by the notion that skos:notation might be used with a  
plain literal? The suggestion is that we temper the original wording:

[[
This property is used to assign a notation to a concept as a typed  
literal [RDF-CONCEPTS <http://www.w3.org/TR/skos-reference/#ref-RDF- 
CONCEPTS>].
]]

which states that typed literals are used for skos:notation (but note  
that there are no semantic conditions, so this would just be  
convention anyway).

> By the way cc Norman Gray, as this conflicts a bit with what I've  
> previously written to him in [2].

It would be very useful to have Norman's comments on this.

	Sean

--
Sean Bechhofer
School of Computer Science
University of Manchester
sean.bechhofer@manchester.ac.uk
http://www.cs.manchester.ac.uk/people/bechhofer
Received on Tuesday, 14 October 2008 08:34:17 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 14 October 2008 08:34:19 GMT