Miles, AJ (Alistair) wrote: > Thesaurus A has a concept ... > > conceptA > a skos:Concept; > skos:inScheme thesaurusA; > skos:prefLabel 'Primary health care'; > skos:altLabel 'General Practise (NHS)'; > skos:altLabel 'GP services'; > skos:altLabel 'Health centres (NHS)'; > skos:altLabel 'NHS Direct'; > skos:altLabel 'Maternity services'. > > > Thesaurus B has a concept ... > > conceptB > a skos:Concept; > skos:inScheme thesaurusB; > skos:prefLabel 'Maternity services'. > > Now although there is a label shared between these two concepts, it is > obvious that concept A is broader in meaning than concept B. So although a > common label suggests that some mapping can be defined, the exact nature of > that mapping cannot be defined without considering the complete intended > meaning of each concept. > > In this case, the appropriate mapping would be ... > > conceptA > skos-map:narrowMapping conceptB. > > conceptB > skos-map:broadMapping conceptA. > > [3] has further examples. If I understood you correctly, you are suggesting that we identify 'concepts' with URIs that do not contain anything to do with the actual literal that is used to describe them in a particular context. So, something like http://simile.mit.edu/concept/2839488484 instead of http://simile.mit.edu/concept/maternity_services is that correct? -- Stefano.
This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Thursday, 22 April 2004 04:30:08 EDT