RE: [Proposal][SKOS-Core] handling top concepts

 
Dear Alistair,

As you ritely identified, it doesn't make much of a difference. Is it sound
to make modifications to the core model for trivial requirements.

Regards,
Kaustubh Supekar

-----Original Message-----
From: public-esw-thes-request@w3.org [mailto:public-esw-thes-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Miles, AJ (Alistair) 
Sent: Wednesday, August 04, 2004 8:46 AM
To: 'Supekar, Kaustubh S.'; 'public-esw-thes@w3.org'
Subject: RE: [Proposal][SKOS-Core] handling top concepts


In an effort to further explain the top concepts problem I wrote some stuff up on the wiki ... see http://esw.w3.org/topic/SkosDev/SkosCore/TopConcepts
which tries to explain the issue from a programmatic point of view.

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 Supekar, Kaustubh 
> S.
> Sent: 03 August 2004 18:15
> To: 'public-esw-thes@w3.org'
> Subject: RE: [Proposal][SKOS-Core] handling top concepts
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Few Questions on the proposal note.
> 
> Can we attribute narrower and broader concepts specific to a *scheme*
> 
> For e.g. 
> I have relationship
> C
> |
> A
> |
> B
> In another scheme say A is a topConcept according to your requirement, 
> that indicates, if I am not mistaken A doesn't have a broader term.
> A
> |
> B
> 
> I think the SKOS Schema currently handles participation of a concept 
> in a particular scheme. Can we specify position of a concept respect 
> to a scheme.
> 
> <skos:concept rdf:about="http://a.com/Concept/001">
> <skos:prefLabel>A</skosprefLabel>
> <skos:inScheme rdf:resource="http://a.com/scheme/1"/>
> <skos:broader>C</skos:broader>
> <skos:narrower>B</skos:narrower>
> </skos:concept>
> 
> How do you represent the alternative hierarchy as mentioned above and 
> attribute it to scheme 2.
> The Question is not limited to TopConcepts. We may have a possibility 
> where the position of a concept in an hierarchy might vary across 
> schemes.
> 
> Am I missing something here?
> 
> Regards,
> Kaustubh Supekar
> Research Intern
> Division of BioMedical Informatics
> Mayo Clinic
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-esw-thes-request@w3.org
> [mailto:public-esw-thes-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Miles, AJ 
> (Alistair)
> Sent: Tuesday, August 03, 2004 11:32 AM
> To: 'public-esw-thes@w3.org'
> Subject: [Proposal][SKOS-Core] handling top concepts
> 
> 
> This is a proposal in relation to the requirement outlined in [1].
> 
> To support identification of top concepts in situations where concepts 
> may be members of more than one concept scheme, I suggest the 
> following actions:
> 
> 1. The skos:TopConcept class be deprecated. 
> 2. A new property skos:hasTopConcept be added, with domain 
> skos:ConceptScheme and range skos:Concept.
> 
> See also [2].
> 
> Al.
> 
> [1]
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-esw-thes/2004Aug/0001.html
> [2] http://esw.w3.org/topic/SkosDev_2fSkosCore_2fTopConcepts
> 
> ---
> 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
>

Received on Wednesday, 4 August 2004 09:51:43 UTC