- From: Dave Reynolds <der@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 12:22:58 +0000
- To: Alexandre Passant <alex@passant.org>
- CC: semantic-web@w3.org, moat-dev@groupe.google.com
Alexandre Passant wrote: > On Jan 21, 2008 12:36 AM, Frederick Giasson <fred@fgiasson.com> wrote: >> Hi, >> >>> Let's look at: >>> http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-swbp-skos-core-guide-20051102/img/ex-sub.pn >> >> Yeah, so instead of a foaf:Document we would have a moat:Meaning. And >> instead of using a moat:concept, we would use a skos:subject. >> >> This could make sense intuitively. Would have to check further if it >> really does. > The problem here is that, again, the skos:subject range is a > skos:Concept, which will not allow people to use existing URIs that > are not defined as skos:Concept Not sure I agree. It means that any URI you use in this way can be inferred to also be a skos:Concept. It may not have been labelled as such in the original source but that doesn't necessarily cause a problem, open world assumption and all that. It *could* lead to a inconsistency if there are some conflicting axioms but that seems somehow unlikely. Are there any specific examples of a resource one might want to use as in this way where inferring they were also a skos:Concept would lead to an inconsistency? Dave -- Hewlett-Packard Limited Registered Office: Cain Road, Bracknell, Berks RG12 1HN Registered No: 690597 England
Received on Monday, 21 January 2008 12:23:38 UTC