- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 11:45:12 -0400
- To: "Miles, AJ (Alistair) " <A.J.Miles@rl.ac.uk>
- Cc: 'Morten Frederiksen' <mof-rdf@mfd-consult.dk>, public-esw@w3.org, "'public-esw-thes@w3.org'" <public-esw-thes@w3.org>, dino@w3.org
* Miles, AJ (Alistair) <A.J.Miles@rl.ac.uk> [2004-08-16 14:15+0100] > > Nice work :) > > Re SKOS Mapping, have you got any suggestions for changes or new features? > > SKOS Core is getting all the attention right now, but I'm happy to do > changes to SKOS Mapping too if they get consensus on the list. Proposal: (dropping the 'has-' idiom in the label, though just my taste...) <rdf:Property rdf:ID="approximate Match"> <rdfs:label>appropximate match</rdfs:label> <rdfs:subPropertyOf rdf:resource="#mappingRelation"/> <rdfs:comment>If concept A has (an) 'approximinate match' to some concept B then typically a majority of resources that have concept A as a (dc:)subject will also have concept B as their (dc:)subject, and vice-versa. This relationship indicates a general, if ill-defined, strong similarity between two SKOS concepts.</rdfs:comment> </rdf:Property> I have a use case for this, in mapping between the SKOS concepts in my personal weblog with those from others I contribute to, eg. SWAD-E and FOAF. (BTW I checked the behaviour of Wordpress w.r.t. deleting categories; it seems to take care _not_ to re-assign its numeric identifiers to subsequently created new categories). cheers, Dan
Received on Monday, 16 August 2004 15:45:12 UTC