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

RE: SKOS for schema.org proposal for discussion

From: Evain, Jean-Pierre <evain@ebu.ch>
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2013 19:54:26 +0000
To: 'Kingsley Idehen' <kidehen@openlinksw.com>, "public-vocabs@w3.org" <public-vocabs@w3.org>
Message-ID: <A71D9E70FCEE5E40A5EAA598864E605705E1187F@maildrs.gva.ebu.ch>
-1 for topic

From: Kingsley Idehen [mailto:kidehen@openlinksw.com]
Sent: lundi, 7. octobre 2013 21:51
To: public-vocabs@w3.org
Subject: Re: SKOS for schema.org proposal for discussion

On 10/7/13 3:20 PM, Stéphane Corlosquet wrote:

On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 3:01 PM, Thad Guidry <thadguidry@gmail.com<mailto:thadguidry@gmail.com>> wrote:
As someone who is brand new to SKOS (in the last 8 months or so).. I will give you my personal opinion, which is in agreement with Jean-Pierre...

Do you represent the audience that schema.org<http://schema.org> is after? >From what I know about you (mostly from this mailing list) I think you have more knowledge and interest about KR than the average developer :) especially being a freebase contributor. Is "SKOS" that popular among web developers who build blog sites or e-commerce site? I don't think so. IMO, "SkosConcept" will look too esoteric to be used by regular site builders/developers, unless they really care to look for the definition of SKOS on wikipedia (something most people won't do).

What do people think of what Martin suggested earlier: TerminologyConcept? Or simply Topic? Topic is a bit more restrictive, but I think is more appealing/intuitive for newbies than SkosConcept.

Steph.


I want to see SkosConcept in Schema.org "as-is".  I have never been confused about the meaning of it, once I read the initial description on Wikipedia about SkosConcept.

Why does the proposal even suggest a "mapping" ?  Why not just use the same label on both sides ?  "SkosConcept" = "skos:Concept"

In Freebase, we decided to use a mapping where we have a our existing topics Typed as a "Vocabulary Equivalent Topic" that are mapped to "Equivalent SKOS Concepts" ... like the Topic of "Painting" that is a form of Artwork that has a Broader Concept of "Graphic arts" so: https://www.freebase.com/m/05qdh#/base/skosbase/vocabulary_equivalent_topic

Before, we just had the label as "Equivalent Topic" ... and it didn't make sense... It was very confusing to me and others and I didn't know on one end if I was still looking at the SKOS Concept... or the Equivalent Topic for something else or another Domain Equivalent Topic.  We ultimately decided to make it less confusing and we renamed to use the term "Equivalent SKOS Concept".. because as Jean-Pierre notes, that SKOS Concept already had the full intended meaning and was already simple and well defined and used in the World Wide Web.

So, I think Guha has a concern, but I do not share his concern, even as someone who is just newly exposed to SKOS.

--
-Thad
Thad on Freebase.com<http://www.freebase.com/view/en/thad_guidry>
Thad on LinkedIn<http://www.linkedin.com/in/thadguidry/>



--
Steph.

+1 for Topic .

End-users see Tags (in the early days of blogging), Hashtags (following Twitter ubiquity) as mechanisms for denoting (naming or "referring to") Topics.. This has been the case for a very long time.




--



Regards,



Kingsley Idehen

Founder & CEO

OpenLink Software

Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com

Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen

Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen

Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about

LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen








------------------------------------------------------------------------------

**************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the system manager. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by the mailgateway
**************************************************
Received on Monday, 7 October 2013 19:56:15 UTC

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