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

Re: SKOS for schema.org proposal for discussion

From: Stéphane Corlosquet <scorlosquet@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2013 13:43:28 -0400
Message-ID: <CAGR+nnGEVGkAoHP88S9OjorcDz9vHNyqiUN596oHVwcBHDZ17g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Guha <guha@google.com>
Cc: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>, jean delahousse <delahousse.jean@gmail.com>, "public-vocabs@w3.org" <public-vocabs@w3.org>
Do you have pointers or references to these Knowledge Representation
systems where Concept is not the same as skos:Concept? Isn't that
considered an edge case? How popular are these compared to the regular use
of Concept (as in SKOS). Isn't that a caveat that there "related
communities" are aware of and could live with?

Steph.


On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 1:23 PM, Guha <guha@google.com> wrote:

> Good point. Maybe not SkosConcept, but something else. My fear is the word
> 'Concept' is so general, that it will be mistaken.  For example, there are
> kinds of Knowledge Representation systems where Concept is the equivalent
> of what is called 'Resource' in RDF. I absolutely want it as a universal
> type, I am just worried about folks in related communities misunderstanding
> it.
>
> guha
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 8:57 AM, Stéphane Corlosquet <scorlosquet@gmail.com
> > wrote:
>
>> Isn't that a slippery slope towards having namespaces in schema.org?
>> (e.g. FoafPerson, GrProduct). What's the intention here? Keep
>> http://schema.org/Concept in case we want to have a generic 'Concept'
>> type later? What's making this proposal too Skos specific that it cannot
>> fulfill the generic type of 'Concept'? Why not just tell people to use
>> skos:Concept then (from the skos namespace)?
>>
>> I don't see the benefits of introducing a namespace/provenance in the
>> type. I think it would make it confusing and require people to have
>> knowledge about the origin vocabulary where the term came from, which goes
>> agasint the goals of schema.org (might as well just use the original
>> term namespace). Also, namespacing terms isn't something that has been done
>> before in schema.org.
>>
>> Steph.
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Oct 6, 2013 at 5:49 PM, Guha <guha@google.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Could we rename 'Concept', which sounds too general, to SkosConcept or
>>> something like that?
>>>
>>> Would be great to see a worked out example.
>>>
>>> guha
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Sep 22, 2013 at 1:08 PM, Stéphane Corlosquet <
>>> scorlosquet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I've added the SKOS proposal sent by Jean Delahousse to the wiki [1]
>>>> and converted it to a schema.org RDFS document [2].
>>>>
>>>> We should probably discuss this proposal further now that's it's on the
>>>> wiki.
>>>>
>>>> Steph.
>>>>
>>>> [1] http://www.w3.org/wiki/WebSchemas/SKOS
>>>> [2]
>>>> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webschema/raw-file/tip/schema.org/ext/skos.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 5:49 PM, Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi!
>>>>>
>>>>> On 10 January 2013 11:13, jean delahousse <delahousse.jean@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> > Hello,
>>>>> >
>>>>> > I have worked on a integration of SKOS into Schema.org.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > The idea is to be able to publish pages about concepts described in a
>>>>> > controled vocabulary and to describe the controlled vocabulary
>>>>> itself.
>>>>> > Use case can be the publication of a library controlled vocabulary
>>>>> as Rameau
>>>>> > from the French National Library (
>>>>> http://data.bnf.fr/13318366/musique/) or
>>>>> > authorities by Library of Congress
>>>>> > (http://id.loc.gov/authorities/subjects/sh2003003686.html) , or a
>>>>> glossary
>>>>> > in a web site.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > I attached the draft. I would be happy to go on with this project
>>>>> with some
>>>>> > of you.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for making a concrete proposal - this is really positive! Your
>>>>> reward is that I ask something more from you ;)
>>>>>
>>>>> Would you have time to make an HTML+RDFa+RDFS version of this proposal?
>>>>>
>>>>> There are some examples in our WebSchemas area of W3C Mercurial repo,
>>>>> here:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webschema/file/default/schema.org/ext
>>>>>
>>>>> I hope they are almost self-explanatory. We can get you access or just
>>>>> send along HTML by mail/wiki. If you don't have time I 100%
>>>>> understand, but I'm trying to build a workflow here that doesn't
>>>>> suffer from my being a bottleneck, so hopefully this machine-readable
>>>>> proposals mechanism will help...
>>>>>
>>>>> cheers,
>>>>>
>>>>> Dan
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Steph.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Steph.
>>
>
>


-- 
Steph.
Received on Monday, 7 October 2013 17:43:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:29:32 UTC