RE: subject indicators ... ?

Thinking about this some more ...

I don't think it makes sense to allow people to *define* a new concept in
relation to someone else's 'indicator' (because presumably the indicator
will include information such as which scheme the concept is a member of,
history notes etc. ... i.e. scheme-local information).

However, I think it does make sense to allow people to *refer* to concepts
via their 'indicator' ... in which case a 'skos:indicator' property *should*
be an IFP.

I.e. if two concept nodes have the same indicator they should be merged.

[i.e. scrap this idea: (?x skos:indicator ?i) (?y skos:indicator ?i) -> (?x
> skos-map:exactMatch ?y)]

Al.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-esw-thes-request@w3.org
> [mailto:public-esw-thes-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Miles, AJ 
> (Alistair)
> 
> Sent: 06 October 2004 14:23
> To: 'public-esw-thes@w3.org'
> Subject: FW: subject indicators ... ?
> 
> 
> 
> >AJM said:
> Also I wasn't talking about identifying concepts in relation 
> to *someone
> elses* indicators, although this would be a possibility [with the
> implication that (?x skos:indicator ?i) (?y skos:indicator ?i) -> (?x
> skos-map:exactMatch ?y)].
> 
> So I just realised that, if allowed to be used in this way, 
> of course a
> 'skos:indicator' type property *should not* be an IFP.
> 
> An alternative name has been suggested to me, something 
> involving the word
> 'indicative' ... e.g. 'indicativeRepresentation' 
> 'indicativeResource' ...
> just throwing ideas out, hoping to work towards a name that 
> reflects well
> the intended usage.
> 
> Al.
>  
> ---
> Alistair Miles
> Research Associate
> CCLRC - Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
> Building R1 Room 1.60
> Fermi Avenue
> Chilton
> Didcot
> Oxfordshire OX11 0QX
> United Kingdom
> Email:        a.j.miles@rl.ac.uk
> Tel: +44 (0)1235 445440
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: public-esw-thes-request@w3.org
> > [mailto:public-esw-thes-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Leonard Will
> > Sent: 05 October 2004 16:49
> > To: public-esw-thes@w3.org
> > Subject: Re: subject indicators ... ?
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > In message 
> > <350DC7048372D31197F200902773DF4C05E50C6E@exchange11.rl.ac.uk>
> >  on Tue, 5 
> > Oct 2004, "Miles, AJ (Alistair)" <A.J.Miles@rl.ac.uk> wrote
> > >The idea I had for a 'skos:indicator' property is that it 
> > points to a 
> > >web resource that consists of a *complete* description of 
> > the concept. 
> > >This should include labels, definitions, examples, etc. 
> > where present.
> > 
> > I would think that the only place you would find a suitable 
> > *complete* 
> > description would be within a knowledge organisation scheme 
> that had 
> > been compiled in accordance with the standards that you are 
> > using. Are 
> > you then just in the situation of borrowing elements from 
> > other KOSs - 
> > i.e. merging or mapping?
> > 
> > >Such a 'skos:indicator' property would also provide an 
> > alternative to 
> > >resolvable URIs for concepts ... i.e. you can have a 
> concept with a 
> > >non-resolvable URI, and if you are looking for a complete 
> > >(content-negotiable) description of that concept, you look up the 
> > >'indicator'.
> > 
> > What could an "indicator" be if it pointed to a web resource 
> > but was not 
> > a URI? I thought that a URI was a general name for something that 
> > pointed to a web resource.
> > 
> > I'm not sure what you mean by "content-negotiable".
> > 
> > Leonard
> > -- 
> > 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, 7 October 2004 13:34:44 UTC