W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-esw-thes@w3.org > October 2004

Re: FW: [Proposal][SKOS-Core] skos:denotes

From: Dave Reynolds <der@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2004 17:12:53 +0100
Message-ID: <415D8205.3010203@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
To: Leonard Will <L.Will@willpowerinfo.co.uk>
Cc: "'public-esw-thes@w3.org'" <public-esw-thes@w3.org>

Leonard Will wrote:

> In message <415D70C5.3000806@hplb.hpl.hp.com> on Fri, 1 Oct 2004, Dave 
> Reynolds <der@hplb.hpl.hp.com> wrote
> 
>> Longer: "We can think of a SKOS concept as standing for the set of 
>> resources which can be classified under that concept. For example, in 
>> a thesaurus of computer science topics used for document 
>> classification one might have a 'Distributed systems' concept which 
>> stands for all the papers which can be classified under 'Distributed 
>> systems'. When the things being classified are represented by RDF 
>> resources then it is useful to have a property which can link the 
>> resource to the SKOS Concept(s) under which it is classified - 
>> skos:classifiedAs is such a property though applications are free to 
>> define more specific sub-properties."
> 
> 
> If I may again translate this into thesaurus-speak, to clarify it in my 
> mind, we would say that "resources" (or "documents") do not form part of 
> a thesaurus.
> 
> When a thesaurus is used to index a collection of documents, we 
> associate one or more thesaurus terms with each document, showing that 
> that document has some relevance to the concepts which the terms 
> represent. This creates a catalogue. I'd prefer to avoid the expression 
> "classified under", because classification is a rather different 
> operation than the assignment of index terms for retrieval purposes.

Sounds fine. So would a name like "skos:indexedUnder" (for a property which 
links from a document/resource to a thesaurus concept) be a preferrable name?

> A thesaurus may have concepts which are "classes of one", often 
> represented by proper names, but these are still concepts, not resources.

Thanks, that's helped to clarify the earlier discussion. So the second 
modeling I suggested (that the analogue of a skos:Concept 'Alistair Miles' 
would be an owl:Class with one member) would be the normal interpretation.

Dave
Received on Friday, 1 October 2004 16:14:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 2 March 2016 13:32:04 UTC