RE: [Proposal][SKOS-Core] public/private notes

I agree, this practice (i.e. using dcterms:audience) should be explained in the Guide with an example.

N.B. the range of the note properties explicitly left empty to allow for the three usage patterns.

Cheers,

Al.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark van Assem [mailto:mark@cs.vu.nl]
> Sent: 01 July 2005 12:56
> To: Miles, AJ (Alistair)
> Cc: public-esw-thes@w3.org
> Subject: Re: [Proposal][SKOS-Core] public/private notes
> 
> 
> Hi Alistair,
> 
> So from the vocabulary itself it would not be clear that we 
> intend the 
> properties to be used like that, because the range of the note 
> properties will be empty?
> 
> I don't know how important this is to make clear in the change 
> proposal (could be done by just including your example), but at any 
> rate it should be explained in the Guide how this works.
> 
> Cheers,
> Mark.
> 
> Miles, AJ (Alistair) wrote:
> >>The reason is clear, but how would the proposed new solution look 
> >>like? Each note-property refers to a blank node, which 
> itself has two 
> >>props linking the actual note and the dcterms:audience? (I suspect 
> >>that's what you mean with "(where the note is represented as 
> >>a related 
> >>resource description or a document reference)."
> > 
> > 
> > Yep, if you wanted to specify the audience of a note, you 
> would do e.g.:
> > 
> > foo:x a skos:Concept;
> >   skos:definition [
> >     rdf:value 'foo bar.';
> >     dcterms:audience 'public';
> >   ];
> > .
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > 
> > Al.
> > 
> > 
> >>Mark.
> >>
> >>
> >>Miles, AJ (Alistair) wrote:
> >>
> >>>This proposal opened:
> >>>
> >>>http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core/proposals#notes-2
> >>>
> >>>How does that look?
> >>>
> >>>Cheers,
> >>>
> >>>Al.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>---
> >>>Alistair Miles
> >>>Research Associate
> >>>CCLRC - Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
> >>>Building R1 Room 1.60
> >>>Fermi Avenue
> >>>Chilton
> >>>Didcot
> >>>Oxfordshire OX11 0QX
> >>>United Kingdom
> >>>Email:        a.j.miles@rl.ac.uk
> >>>Tel: +44 (0)1235 445440
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>-----Original Message-----
> >>>>From: public-esw-thes-request@w3.org
> >>>>[mailto:public-esw-thes-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Miles, AJ 
> >>>>(Alistair)
> >>>>Sent: 14 June 2005 14:59
> >>>>To: Houghton,Andrew
> >>>>Cc: public-esw-thes@w3.org
> >>>>Subject: RE: [Proposal][SKOS-Core] public/private notes
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>Hi Andy,
> >>>>
> >>>>Yes, this is exactly what I had in mind :)
> >>>>
> >>>>Al.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>-----Original Message-----
> >>>>>From: Houghton,Andrew [mailto:houghtoa@oclc.org]
> >>>>>Sent: 13 June 2005 19:03
> >>>>>To: Miles, AJ (Alistair); public-esw-thes@w3.org
> >>>>>Subject: RE: [Proposal][SKOS-Core] public/private notes
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>From: public-esw-thes-request@w3.org 
> >>>>>>[mailto:public-esw-thes-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Miles, 
> >>>>>>AJ (Alistair)
> >>>>>>Sent: 13 June, 2005 12:32
> >>>>>>To: public-esw-thes@w3.org
> >>>>>>Subject: [Proposal][SKOS-Core] public/private notes
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Hi all,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>b) Re the discussion of public versus private notes, I 
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>agree you can't 
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>lay this down from above. For example, definitions 
> >>>>
> >>>>could be made 
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>public for one audience, private for another.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>I propose that the skos:publicNote and skos:privateNote 
> >>>>>>properties be deprecated, and replaced by a single property 
> >>>>>>e.g. 'skos:note'.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>The audience of a note may then be specified by using the 
> >>>>>>dcterms:audience property.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Any objections to me opening this as a proposal on 
> >>>>>>http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core/proposals
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Currently in the 10 May 2005 draft these properties have a 
> >>>>
> >>>>hierarchy:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>skos:publicNote
> >>>>> skos:definition
> >>>>> skos:scopeNote
> >>>>> skos:example
> >>>>> skos:historyNote
> >>>>>
> >>>>>skos:privateNote
> >>>>> skos:editorialNote
> >>>>> skos:changeNote
> >>>>>
> >>>>>So it sounds like your proposal is to change the hierarchy to:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>skos:note
> >>>>> skos:definition
> >>>>> skos:scopeNote
> >>>>> skos:example
> >>>>> skos:historyNote
> >>>>> skos:editorialNote
> >>>>> skos:changeNote
> >>>>>
> >>>>>I'm also assuming that skos:note will allow you to make 
> >>>>>additional note types, just like publicNote and privateNote 
> >>>>>did.  In addition, if you want to specify dcterms:audience, 
> >>>>>then you will have to use the second (documentation as a 
> >>>>>related resource description) method.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>If I understand the proposal correctly, then I feel this 
> >>>>>would be a positive change.  In looking at SKOS in relation 
> >>>>>to the DDC, we have struggled with SKOS note types, since 
> >>>>>there are well over 100 different note types in DDC with 
> >>>>>varying degrees of "public-ness" or "private-ness" for 
> >>>>>licensees and translators.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Andy.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>-- 
> >>  Mark F.J. van Assem - Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
> >>        mark@cs.vu.nl - http://www.cs.vu.nl/~mark
> >>
> > 
> > 
> 
> -- 
>   Mark F.J. van Assem - Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
>         mark@cs.vu.nl - http://www.cs.vu.nl/~mark
>

Received on Friday, 1 July 2005 14:11:54 UTC