W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-vocabs@w3.org > November 2013

Re: MiniSKOS update: back to "Topic" (but thanks for trying out the ConceptCode idea)

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2013 16:23:11 +0000
Message-ID: <CAK-qy=7WXnRs5QJHP9C2O=9K_7_JZ05CjjsZm5zwiDr3xgnNxQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com>
Cc: Stéphane Corlosquet <scorlosquet@gmail.com>, Niklas Lindström <lindstream@gmail.com>, Justin Boyan <jaboyan@google.com>, Web Schemas TF <public-vocabs@w3.org>, Phil Barker <phil.barker@hw.ac.uk>
On 22 November 2013 16:17, Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1 ... BUT ... please, please, please.... in the description of Topic... note the difference between a Thing, and a Topic.  In fact, give 1 example showing Thing and Topic being used hand in hand.

OK, it's certainly examples time. I think lurking beneath the lack of
strong consensus on a type name are different expectations about the
scope of this mechanism. I'll try to collect some examples but please
also can people share some brief examples in this thread?

BTW on the scope question (and in favour of the 'code' view of
things), it's worth pointing out the W3C Data Cube work, which uses
SKOS for various kinds of coded list in statistical data --- e.g.
gender, geo etc. See http://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-data-cube/#schemes

Received on Friday, 22 November 2013 16:23:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:29:35 UTC