- From: Houghton,Andrew <houghtoa@oclc.org>
- Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 13:19:57 -0400
- To: public-esw-thes@w3.org
> -----Original Message----- > From: Stella Dextre Clarke [mailto:sdclarke@lukehouse.demon.co.uk] > Sent: 14 October, 2004 13:00 > Subject: RE: search labels > > > Could be useful. Mis-spellings can be useful to assist search > (provided they are common, unambiguous and distinctive, > unlikely to be confused with another preferred term. See our > draft BS8723 Part 2) and it is good to be able to keep them > separate from normal non-preferred terms Stella > > -----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 17:17 > To: 'public-esw-thes@w3.org' > Subject: search labels > > This is just a thought, but what about a property called e.g. > 'searchLabel' that allows you to add labels to a concept to aid user > search, where you > *don't* want those labels to appear among the meaning-defining set of > labels for that concept. This could be used e.g. for common > mis-spellings of another label. > I assume that if this proposal were to go forward that skos:searchLabel would become a sub-property of rdfs:label as is skos:prefLabel and skos:altLabel. Would you want to distinguish between labels that were part of the thesaurus proper or not? This might indicate another abstract level like: rdfs:label skos:inThesaurusLabel skos:prefLabel skos:altLabel skos:nonThesaurusLabel skos:searchLabel I used skos:inThesaurusLabel and skos:nonThesaurusLabel as abstract types and am not suggesting these names. So the question in my mind is: would you want this level of abstraction or is making skos:searchLabel a sub-property of rdfs:label sufficient? Andy.
Received on Thursday, 14 October 2004 17:20:03 UTC