W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-esw-thes@w3.org > November 2003

Re: Design Issue (2) - To concept or not to concept

From: Dave Reynolds <der@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 10:56:51 +0000
Message-ID: <3FA785F3.9000004@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
To: "Miles, AJ (Alistair) " <A.J.Miles@rl.ac.uk>
Cc: "'public-esw-thes@w3.org'" <public-esw-thes@w3.org>

I'd suggest option 1.

The open world approach of RDF means that you can take any resource and decide 
later that it is of rdf:type soks:Concept. So this doesn't prevent you using the 
TBL fragment identifier convention for concepts and have some processor deduce 
that these must be soks:Concepts.

Dave

Miles, AJ (Alistair) wrote:

> I've added this issue to the discussion on the RDF Thesaurus wiki page
> <http://esw.w3.org/topic/RdfThesaurus>
> 
> Here is a summary:-
> 
> 2.2 Issue 2 - To concept or not to concept
> 
> 
> A thesaurus is a collection of concepts. So for the core-vocab we need to
> model abstract concepts in RDF. 
> 
> Option 1 - We define an rdfs:Class called soks:Concept. We use this to type
> resources that are intend ed to refer to abstract concepts. 
> 
> Option 2 - We define no such class. We use some other way to determine
> whether a resource is a concept or not, if at all we need to. 
> 
> === Comments on Issue 2 === 
> 
> AJM>> 
> 
> At the recent SWAD meeting at HP, Chaals said (correct me if I'm wrong) in
> RDF every resource with a URI that has a fragment identifier necessarily is
> an abstract concept. Therefore we don't need a type for concepts. 
> 
> I say: 
> 
> 1.	My reading of the debate & TimBL's writeups is that resources with a
> <http://> uri and a frag id MAY (but NOT necessarily) refer to an abstract
> concept. Resources with a <http://> uri and without a frag ID may NOT be an
> abstract concept (must necessarily be a document). 
> 2.	If we have a soks:Concept class, we can type b-nodes as concepts. So
> we can use reference by description to make statements about abstract
> concepts without URIs. 
> 3.	It makes the format look nicer if it starts with 'Concept' rather
> than 'rdf:Description' all the time. This may be a serious point for KOS &
> DL people. 
> 
> 
> 
> 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
> Telephone: +44 (0)1235 445440
> 
> 
Received on Tuesday, 4 November 2003 05:59:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:45:08 UTC