- From: Lars Marius Garshol <larsga@ontopia.net>
- Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 08:11:52 +0200
- To: "'public-esw-thes@w3.org'" <public-esw-thes@w3.org>
* AJ Miles | | 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 think the requirement underlying this proposal is very important: to be able to return search matches in the case where the user has used a name for the concept that is different from the canonical one. However, the 'searchLabel' property is very low on semantics. It implies that the value is a label (or name) for the concept, but that for some reason its value is restricted to search. It fails to make clear *why* it is restricted to search, however. In topic maps we would not have this problem: a name is a name, and it can be qualified in several different ways (non-preferred, misspelled, obsolete, ...) without obscuring the fact that it *is* a name, and that it *is* somehow qualified (even if the meaning of the qualifier is unknown). This leads me to wonder whether perhaps an 'abstract' property could be defined. That is, a property which is not intended to be used directly, but from which users could derive subproperties that do have precise semantics. This leaves us with the question of what to call the abstract property, of course. 'searchLabel' might work, but I suspect many things would be lumped under it, whether their utility is restricted to search or not, and regardless of whether it is abstract or not. -- Lars Marius Garshol, Ontopian <URL: http://www.ontopia.net > GSM: +47 98 21 55 50 <URL: http://www.garshol.priv.no >
Received on Tuesday, 19 October 2004 06:11:54 UTC