- From: NJ Rogers, Learning and Research Technology <Nikki.Rogers@bristol.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 14:43:59 -0000
- To: "Miles, AJ (Alistair)" <A.J.Miles@rl.ac.uk>, "'public-esw-thes@w3.org'" <public-esw-thes@w3.org>
Nope sorry, you've lost me here Al! What does 'skos:partOf' achieve for us, except for some sense of symmetry or completeness in terms of the structural model you're referring to? And what does "skos:relatedPartOf" actually mean - can you give me a "real-world" example of where this would be used to link two concepts? The rest of it I'm fine with. Apologies if I'm missing the obvious with my questions, Nikki --On 25 February 2004 14:17 +0000 "Miles, AJ (Alistair) " <A.J.Miles@rl.ac.uk> wrote: > > Here's a possible solution to the longstanding problem of overloaded > semantics in thesaurus-style relationships. > > We have a set of properties for building a CONCEPTUAL STRUCTURE. These > structural properties carry very weak semantics, if any. The > skos:narrower and skos:broader props allow organising concepts into a > hierarchy. The skos:related property allows associative links between > branches of the hierarchy. To reiterate, these props imply no semantics, > they just allow building of a structure, or to put it another way, > structural organisation of concepts. > > We have a second set of properties which carry well defined semantics. > There is one for the instantive (instance-of) relationship - rdf:type. > There is one for the generic (class subsumption) relationship - > rdfs:subClassOf. And there should be one for the partitive (part-of) > relationship - ??? (call it skos:partOf for now, although there must be > some reference property we could use). > > So then these two sets of props are the building blocks for all other > props. For example: > > skos:broaderInstantive > rdfs:subPropertyOf skos:broader; > rdfs:subPropertyOf rdf:type. > > skos:broaderGeneric > rdfs:subPropertyOf skos:broader; > rdfs:subPropertyOf rdfs:subClassOf. > > skos:broaderPartitive > rdfs:subPropertyOf skos:broader; > rdfs:subPropertyOf skos:partOf. > > (or the alternative structural rendering of the partitive relationship > ...) > > skos:relatedPartOf > rdfs:subPropertyOf skos:related; > rdfs:subPropertyOf skos:partOf. > > ... So each one of these properties has a structural component and a > semantic component, and these two components have been factored out. > That's the idea. > > What does everyone think? > > Al. > > > > ---------------------- NJ Rogers, Technical Researcher (Semantic Web Applications Developer) Institute for Learning and Research Technology (ILRT) Email:nikki.rogers@bristol.ac.uk Tel: +44(0)117 9287096 (Direct) Tel: +44(0)117 9287193 (Office)
Received on Wednesday, 25 February 2004 09:36:11 UTC