- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 14:12:17 -0500 (EST)
- To: "Miles, AJ (Alistair) " <A.J.Miles@rl.ac.uk>
- Cc: "Dave Beckett (E-mail)" <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>, "Nikki Rogers (E-mail)" <Nikki.Rogers@bristol.ac.uk>, "'public-esw-thes@w3.org'" <public-esw-thes@w3.org>
Yep, these all look good to me... I think it is reasonably useful to have the namespace be where the schema is (in the absence of any better format to have there, it means people can try and find out what the terms are). It would also be nice to have more commentary in the schema - using rdfs:comment instead of XML comments, for example... cheers Chaals On Wed, 4 Feb 2004, Miles, AJ (Alistair) wrote: >My proposal for the SKOS-Core 1.0 schema: > >http://www.w3c.rl.ac.uk/SWAD/rdf/skos_core_1_0.rdf > >Changes I suggest from pre-release version (online at >http://www.w3c.rl.ac.uk/SWAD/rdf/skos_0_1.rdf): > >1. Get rid of <soks:descriptor> property > >2. Get rid of <soks:generalNote> <soks:historyNote> <soks:editorNote> ><soks:hierarchyNote>. Re-introduce them later if a real need is reported. > >3. Introduce <soks:definition> <soks:example> as further ways fo descibing >a concept (less thesaurus-centric) >
Received on Wednesday, 4 February 2004 14:12:31 UTC