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

SKOS Namespace [ISSUE-153 and ISSUE-175]

From: Sean Bechhofer <sean.bechhofer@manchester.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2008 10:09:07 +0000
Message-Id: <3C7AAAD6-59A0-44F3-969E-5B6663903892@manchester.ac.uk>
To: SWD Working SWD <public-swd-wg@w3.org>

	
At ISWC, I had a long discussion with Mike Uschold about the  
namespace change issue. You may have seen his email summarising his  
position on the semantic-web list [1]. I tend to disagree with Mike  
here, and I am now of the opinion that sticking with the original  
namespace and changing the semantics of the term is the approach we  
should take (as resolved in the 07/10/08 telecon [2]). I also note a  
response from Michael Lang (Jr.) [3] which essentially matches Simon  
Jupp's opinion [4] and (as I read it) supports our position.

It may be worthwhile making it clear somewhere that one of the  
reasons why we feel that we are able to do this is because there were  
explicit warnings of possible changes to the vocabulary before Rec  
(as highlighted by Jeremy [5]). Should this be included in the  
Reference Appendix discussing the namespace?

	Sean

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/semantic-web/2008Oct/0192.html
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Oct/0114.html
[3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/semantic-web/2008Oct/0197.html
[4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Oct/0036.html
[5] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Oct/0077.html

--
Sean Bechhofer
School of Computer Science
University of Manchester
sean.bechhofer@manchester.ac.uk
http://www.cs.manchester.ac.uk/people/bechhofer
Received on Friday, 31 October 2008 10:09:36 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 31 October 2008 10:09:37 GMT