- From: Miles, AJ (Alistair) <A.J.Miles@rl.ac.uk>
- Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2004 15:26:54 +0100
- To: "'public-esw-thes@w3.org'" <public-esw-thes@w3.org>
Hi all, We made a good start on this issue earlier in the year, here is a write up of the specific requirement ... [see also <http://esw.w3.org/topic/SkosDev/SkosCore/CollectionsAndArrays>] Many thesauri group small sets of concepts under what's called a 'node label' or 'guide term', for example this from the AAT ... chairs <chairs by form> armchairs ax chairs backstools Barcelona chairs barrel chairs ... ... or this from the English Heritage thesaurus of historic aircraft ... AIRCRAFT AIRCRAFT <BY FUNCTION> TEST AIRCRAFT FIGHTER BOMBER TRAINER TRANSPORTER RECONNAISSANCE TARGET ARMY COOPERATION TUG This type of collection of concepts is commonly called an 'array', where the array label identifies some 'characteristic of division' for the contents of that array. The consensus seems to be that the node label (i.e. 'chairs by form' or 'aircraft by function') should not be modelled as a label for a concept in its own right, but rather as a label for a collection of concepts. The matter is complicated further because in some arrays, the ordering of concepts is meaningful. However, in other arrays the ordering of concepts is not meaningful. The RDF description of an 'array' must therefore provide a way to distinguish between these two cases, primarily so that applications handling the data can know whether they should preserve the original ordering, or whether they are free to reorder the contents of an array by some criterion, for example alphabetically. SKOS-Core requires some framework for supporting arrays of concepts as described here. --- 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 Monday, 9 August 2004 14:27:32 UTC