Re: skos:TopConcept

In message <GOEIKOOAMJONEFCANOKCKEBAEBAA.bernard.vatant@mondeca.com> on 
Thu, 13 May 2004, Bernard Vatant <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com> wrote
>
>skos:TopConcept is not defined as a subclass of skos:Concept
>
>Why is it so?

Is it necessary to have "skos:TopConcept"? I assume that a "top concept" 
is just a concept that happens, for the moment, to have no relationships 
to any broader concepts.

As it is therefore possible to identify top concepts by looking at 
relationships, do they need to go in a distinct subclass? If BT 
relationships are added or removed during editing of a thesaurus, an 
additional operation would presumably be needed to move the concept in 
or out of the "top concept" subclass.

Descriptors in a thesaurus are sometimes given a "top concept" or "top 
term (TT)" relationship, showing the term(s) at the top of the 
hierarchy(ies) in which the descriptor occurs. This is mainly to help 
people to find the term in a printed hierarchical display, and should 
not be necessary if such displays can be generated on demand, as 
discussed here recently.

While writing this, Andy's response has just appeared. I agree with him 
that if "top concept" is really being used as the name of a facet or 
category, it would be better to name it accordingly.

Leonard Will
-- 
Willpower Information       (Partners: Dr Leonard D Will, Sheena E Will)
Information Management Consultants              Tel: +44 (0)20 8372 0092
27 Calshot Way, Enfield, Middlesex EN2 7BQ, UK. Fax: +44 (0)870 051 7276
L.Will@Willpowerinfo.co.uk               Sheena.Will@Willpowerinfo.co.uk
---------------- <URL:http://www.willpowerinfo.co.uk/> -----------------

Received on Thursday, 13 May 2004 13:11:20 UTC