- From: Carl Mattocks <carlmattocks@checkmi.com>
- Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 09:02:58 -0400 (EDT)
- To: charles@w3.org
- Cc: carlmattocks@checkmi.com, "Charles McCathieNevile" <charles@w3.org>, "Stella Dextre Clarke" <sdclarke@lukehouse.demon.co.uk>, "'Miles,\ AJ \(Alistair\) '" <a.j.miles@rl.ac.uk>, "'Leonard Will'" <l.will@willpowerinfo.co.uk>, public-esw-thes@w3.org
Chaaals : ... but what if I do care about compatibility ? Say I want to declare a 'home construction' thesaurus that maintains 'concept synergy' with the publishers of the Getty Art Thesaurus .. How do I use your notion of 'forwards / backwards compatible lumping'? or are you saying that 'forwards / backwards compatible lumping' is only required for the Skos Core ? carl <quote who="charles@w3.org"> >> >> Chaals : >> >> Clarification accepted with thanks .. but requesting more on the >> 'forwards >> / backwards compatible lumping' >> (1) within a single thesaurus >> - same set of author(s) / steward(s) thus same purpose >> (2) a different thesaurus . >> - different (single) set of author(s) / steward(s) different purpose > > Well, this is the glory of the semantic web (and what makes it seem > different to traditional systems). You don't really care who the author is > of a second thesaurus - including a thesaurus that is mostly the same as > an original one, with a few terms changed. > > This is a consequence of building a system that can work on the Semantic > Web - anyone can say anything about anything, so anyone can make a > thesaurus describing a particular use of some collection of concepts. (See > the notes about etiquette in my reply to Bernard. Some day soon we will be > able to use trust management systems to get stronger control than social > etiquette. But the underlying technical stuff stays the same...) > > As Al suggested, if you define a set of concepts (there is no reason not > to include relations between them) at that point, you can then define a > thesaurus using those concepts. Or someone else can build a thesaurus > using the concepts. So you cover either case - and the technical approach > for describing what it means to deprecate the use of a term or concept in > a particular thesaurus doesn't mean that the concept itself magically > vanishes from the universe. > > Cheers > > Chaals > > > > -- Carl Mattocks co-Chair OASIS (ISO/TS 15000) ebXMLRegistry Semantic Content SC co-Chair OASIS Business Centric Methodology TC CEO CHECKMi v/f (usa) 908 322 8715 www.CHECKMi.com Semantically Smart Compendiums (AOL) IM CarlCHECKMi
Received on Tuesday, 12 October 2004 13:03:03 UTC