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

Re: SKOS proposal - labels and notes

From: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2013 10:32:15 -0700
Message-ID: <5265651F.2060701@kcoyle.net>
To: public-vocabs@w3.org

On 10/21/13 9:26 AM, Bernard Vatant wrote:
> All
> I wonder if we are not confusing two discussions.
> The original proposal to include SKOS in schema.org <http://schema.org>
> had a very focused objective, as expressed if I remember correctly by
> Jean Delahousse.
> Suppose I publish a SKOS vocabulary, with typically one page by concept,
> how do I markup this page so that search engines understand that this is
> a page describing a concept in a vocabulary, and this description uses
> SKOS constructions, including skos:prefLabel etc.
> e.g., how do I markup
> http://id.loc.gov/authorities/subjects/sh87005122.html with schema.org
> <http://schema.org>?
> For this issue, the closer the schema.org <http://schema.org> extension
> to original SKOS vocabulary used by such pages, the easier the usage by
> vocabulary publishers.

For that case, wouldn't a separate schema.org type be appropriate, 
rather than adding the SKOS labels to Thing?

> A somehow different issue is to answer a need to express in schema.org
> <http://schema.org> "here I am about some kind of
> subject/topic/category/concept" and to indicate this concept as
> accurately as possible using labels, identifiers, descriptions.
> If distinction between prefLabel and other kind of labels is relevant to
> the former case, it is not necessarily to the latter. There are many
> other ways to categorize names outside libraries and thesaurus than into
> "pref" and "alt". You might want to say that this is a "long label" for
> display of full description on large screens, and that is a "short
> label" to be used on portable devices. In biology you will have
> "scientific name" versus "vernacular", and the first one might be also a
> full name or a short one. Chemicals and various products have all sort
> of naming conventions for which distinction between "pref" and "alt" are
> also irrelevant.

Right. Pref and alt are very specific to term-based concept lists. And 
even they are barely sufficient -- lists of names often have full names 
and acronyms, former names, etc. SKOS definitely took its "S" for 
"simple" seriously.

> Hence for the second issue why not having something like an extremely
> generic and open way to say I'm speaking about something named "foo",
> and the type of this name is "bar", the type of name being defined in
> some (open) enumeration (including prefLabel, altLabel, vernacular name,
> long name, short name etc etc). Enabling SKOS-like markup, but not being
> tied to SKOS view of the world.

How would one address schema:name in such a case? Isn't name a literal? 
If I'm mis-understanding your point here, maybe a short example would help.


> Bernard
> 2013/10/21 Wallis,Richard <Richard.Wallis@oclc.org
> <mailto:Richard.Wallis@oclc.org>>
>      > http://schema.org/name is currently defined as 'The name of the
>     item.'
>      > (you might argue it should say 'a name' not 'the name', but setting
>      > that aside for now)
>     Yes set it aside into the 'tweaks we need to do in the next update'
>     pile.
>      > To the extent concepts have names at all, I'd
>      > guess their preferred labels would all be names.
>     Or at least close enough for a mapping to schema:name.
>      >
>      > If not, i.e. if every preferred label of a concept is also a
>     name, and
>      > if we still want to maintain an explicit notion of 'preferred label',
>      > then this seems a good candidate for describing as a sub-property /
>      > super-property relationship. We've used that notion already in the
>      > Action design, to relate focussed action-type-specific properties to
>      > the broader, vaguer properties on http://schema.org/Action. It might
>      > help here too (even though schema.org <http://schema.org> term
>     navigation doesn't offer
>      > any support for sub-property links yet).
>     I think this makes sense - a preferred label/name is still a name.
>     Also in multilingual world a thing (and a concept) can not only have
>     several names, it can have several preferred names - potentially one
>     per language.
>     ~Richard.
> --
> *Bernard Vatant
> *
> Vocabularies & Data Engineering
> Tel : + 33 (0)9 71 48 84 59
> Skype : bernard.vatant
> Blog : the wheel and the hub <http://bvatant.blogspot.com>
> Linked Open Vocabularies : lov.okfn.org <http://lov.okfn.org>
> --------------------------------------------------------
> *Mondeca*****
> 3 cité Nollez 75018 Paris, France
> www.mondeca.com <http://www.mondeca.com/>
> Follow us on Twitter : @mondecanews <http://twitter.com/#%21/mondecanews>
> ----------------------------------------------------------

Karen Coyle
kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet
Received on Monday, 21 October 2013 17:32:45 UTC

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