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

Re: SKOS for schema.org proposal for discussion

From: Holger Knublauch <holger@topquadrant.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2013 08:51:21 +1000
Message-ID: <523F7469.5090104@topquadrant.com>
To: public-vocabs@w3.org
It is great to see that skos:prefLabel is being mapped to schema:name 
(aka rdfs:label) instead of keeping it separate. Judging from the SKOS 
files that I have seen, many users are confused about which property to 
use and end up duplicating labels. But I believe the same could happen 
with skos:definition - why not use schema:description.

Likewise, altLabel and hiddenLabel may be sufficiently generic to be 
upgraded to Thing, in support of semantic search.

changeNote, example, and the other *note properties also seem to be of 
general interest for anyone maintaining a track record of semantic data. 
I do acknowledge that Thing shouldn't have too many properties, so there 
could be a Note class with corresponding subclasses and a field for 
author and time stamp, and any Thing could have any number of Notes 
attached to it.


On 9/23/2013 6:18, Dan Brickley wrote:
> +Cc: Jeremy, Andreas
> On 22 September 2013 21:12, Stéphane Corlosquet <scorlosquet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Personally, I'm strongly in favor of this SKOS-lite proposal and would like
>> to see it in schema.org. This would be useful in particular for the Drupal 8
>> schema.org integration. In Drupal 7 we've been using skos:Concept and
>> skos:prefLabel to annotate the taxonomy terms type and name in RDFa (see
>> example [1]). There is currently no real equivalent in schema.org. At the
>> moment we're using the weaker schema:Thing in Drupal 8, but having a
>> schema:Concept would be more appropriate IMO. In Drupal, taxonomy terms (aka
>> tags) are often use to tag articles or pieces of content in general. We're
>> currently using schema:about to link articles to their tags in the default
>> article content type that comes pre-installed, so having a schema:Concept
>> would be a good companion to schema:about, and more precise than
>> schema:Thing.
> Hey, this is great - many thanks for restarting this discussion.
> I am very sympathetic to this too. We have several ad-hoc places in
> schema.org where categories and code lists could be modeled in a more
> structured manner (but without having a full entities/properties
> approach). For example, JobPosting job taxonomies, LRMI educational
> AlignmentObject codes, recipe and event categories, ... It has also
> cropped up in recent discussion around the idea of additional rNews
> extensions relating to http://www.bbc.co.uk/ontologies/storyline/
> I'm not sure the direct mapping of ConceptScheme to Enumeration works
> as intended, but that's a relatively minor point. I imagine some
> vocabulary publishers might choose to publish using RDFa Lite + SKOS +
> schema.org simultaneously.
> Stéphane, on the Drupal front, how much is built-in to the core now
> versus handled by one of the countless 3rd party Drupal extensions?
> Dan
>> Steph.
>> [1] http://zbw.eu/labs/en/taxonomy/term/3
>> On Sun, Sep 22, 2013 at 10:08 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.
Received on Sunday, 22 September 2013 22:52:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:29:31 UTC