- From: Miles, AJ (Alistair) <A.J.Miles@rl.ac.uk>
- Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 15:49:22 +0100
- To: public-esw-thes@w3.org
Hi, Although Danbri had me convinced [1], I found Dave R's argument compelling [2]. Both points of view seem good to me, or at least appropriate under a particular set of circumstances. So here's an attempt to accommodate both points of view ... what if we do the following: (1) Add a new property 'skos:denotesSameAs' to SKOS Core, which is *symmetric* and which carries essentially the same semantics as skos-map:exactMatch. (2) Add a new property 'skos:denotesClass' to SKOS Core, with domain skos:Concept and range rdfs:Class, *as a sub-property of skos:denotesSameAs*. (3) Add a new property 'skos:denotesIndividual' to SKOS Core, with domain skos:Concept and range rdf:Resource, *as a sub-property of skos:denotesSameAs*. So (1) establishes the underlying ontological commitment that a skos:Concept sits at the same level of abstraction as an RDFS/OWL Class/Individual. However, (2) and (3) allow the *directionality* of such a relationship to be captured, where that is required. Er, re-reading that it back to myself, it sounds potentially a little shaky, but I'll post this anyway, and hopefully it will stimulate more ideas. Al. [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-esw-thes/2004Sep/0067.html [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-esw-thes/2004Oct/0005.html --- 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 Miles, AJ > (Alistair) > > Sent: 14 October 2004 15:25 > To: 'Leo Sauermann'; public-esw-thes@w3.org > Subject: RE: [Proposal][SKOS-Core] skos:denotes > > > > Hi Leo, > > To answer the easiest question first, the 'traditional' way > to use SKOS > concepts is as the values in a subject-based index of > documents. There is a > proposal on the table [1] for a 'skos:subject' property, > which basically > behaves in the same way to the 'dc:subject' property, i.e. > you will be able > to state: > > <rdf:RDF /*standard namespaces*/> > > <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://foo.com/somedoc.html"> > <skos:subject rdf:resource="http://bar.com/some#concept"/> > </rdf:Description> > > </rdf:RDF> > > Of course, there are many other scenarios emerging in which > SKOS concepts > can be used (and your use case is expanding the set I had > imagined so far > :). For example, a SKOS concept can be depicted by an image, > or a SKOS > concept could be a topic of interest or expertise for a person ... > > Anyway. Another set of scenarios (including yours I think) > requires us to > be able to express a relationship between a SKOS concept and > an RDFS/OWL > Class/Individual that 'intends'/'represents'/'denotes' the > same (or similar) > thing. This requirement was the basis for the original 'skos:denotes' > proposal [2] which has been argued for by danbri (see e.g. [3]). > > However, others have argued that a relationship of meaning > between a SKOS > concept and an RDFS/OWL Class/Individual is essentially the same as a > mapping relationship between two SKOS concepts (see e.g. > [4]). Or in other > words, there is no difference in the level of abstraction > between a SKOS > concept and an RDFS/OWL Class/Individual. Hence a > 'skos:denotes' property > is not appropriate. > > So this debate is currently poised :) > > I'm just thinking, perhaps a more detailed description of > your requirements > here could help us with this problem ... could you expand a > little on these > for us? > > Thanks, > > Alistair. > > [1] > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-esw-thes/2004Oct/0081.html > [2] > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-esw-thes/2004Sep/0041.html > [3] > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-esw-thes/2004Sep/0067.html > [4] > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-esw-thes/2004Oct/0005.html > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: public-esw-thes-request@w3.org > [mailto:public-esw-thes-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Leo Sauermann > Sent: 14 October 2004 09:46 > To: public-esw-thes@w3.org > Subject: Re: [Proposal][SKOS-Core] skos:denotes > > > Danbri: > > > RDF tries to impose some basic design constraints across > all projects > > that use it, to make things easier for data-merging, extensibility > > etc. What we're doing with skos:represents (or whatever it gets > > called) is coming up with a little add-on that helps SKOS-based RDF > > data work better with non-SKOS RDF data. > > > I could not follow the whole discussion, because I began > thinking about skos > a week ago > http://leobard.twoday.net/stories/360443/ > > My Goal is: > > I want to build stuctures that are independent of nromal RDF > instances, that > means: I want to model things like "Job" > "Private" "ProjectX" and form these things as SKOS:Concepts > > then I have emails, files, photos, websites, etc that I want > to add to these > SKOS:concepts > > Ideal: > SKOS concepts > REAL LIFE Resources > > JOB > - Project X > - Meeting 23.10.2004 > - Project Y > Email "skos;denoites" > File "skos image" > Website "skos website" > Website "http://www.w3.org/2001/sw" > > > now I want > <meeting 23.10.2004> <????> <http://www.w3.org/2001/sw> > > > the problem: > You forgot to add somehting to skos that allows to acutally USE skos. > A thesaurus /taxonomy/ whatever is only useful when I can link it to > external RDF resources, > > All predicates in SKOS are having domain/range skos Concepts, > but SKOS concepts are a closed thing and I want to create > triples from skos > to the outer world. > The "real" resources out there in the world are of type > email, file, person, > vcard, vEvent > > So, please, > tell me which property I have to use to hang real resources to a SKOS > concept. > is this SKOS:denotes? > > is it dc:hasPart ? > > cheers > Leo >
Received on Thursday, 14 October 2004 14:49:56 UTC