W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-esw-thes@w3.org > October 2004

Re: search labels

From: Carl Mattocks <carlmattocks@checkmi.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 11:01:28 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <51617.>
To: "Leonard Will" <L.Will@willpowerinfo.co.uk>
Cc: public-esw-thes@w3.org

et Leonard :
Agreed there should be an explicit declaration of 'non-preferred' labels
Agreed there are some obvious declarations ' misspellings, abbreviations,
obsolete terms, terms in another language, quasi-synonyms and so on '

Before we go absolutely granular on these declarations ...
given all these declarations are highly subjective ..
can we agree that the 'author' of each 'non-preferred' label be part of
the declaration ?
That is, rather than declare caveat emptor , ccan we agree there will be
greater acceptance of 'what is preferred and what is not preferred' when
the author is known.


<quote who="Leonard Will">
> In message <m3ekjv2q53.fsf@ontopia.net> on Tue, 19 Oct 2004, Lars Marius
> Garshol <larsga@ontopia.net> wrote
>>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
> This makes sense, if there is a mechanism for implementing it in skos.
> It seems best, and in accordance with good XML principles,  to identify
> the nature of the label and leave the issue of how it is dealt with
> (e.g. hidden or not) as a presentation issue for the application that
> uses it.
> I think that there is a clear distinction, though, between the single
> preferred label, which is used to create links between a concept and
> resources in a catalogue, and alt labels, which are used only within the
> thesaurus to find the preferred label for a concept. I would therefore
> still use preferred/alt as the initial dichotomy.
> It may be helpful to distinguish different types of non-preferred (alt)
> labels, such as misspellings, abbreviations, obsolete terms, terms in
> another language, quasi-synonyms and so on.
> Mapping and merging from another thesaurus is a different issue, and the
> way terms would be labelled there would depend on whether you considered
> the result to be a single combined thesaurus or a mapping of thesauri
> that remain distinct.
> 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/> -----------------

Carl Mattocks

co-Chair OASIS (ISO/TS 15000) ebXMLRegistry Semantic Content SC
co-Chair OASIS Business Centric Methodology TC
v/f (usa) 908 322 8715
Semantically Smart Compendiums
Received on Wednesday, 20 October 2004 15:01:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:45:16 UTC