- From: Carl Mattocks <carlmattocks@checkmi.com>
- Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 11:01:28 -0400 (EDT)
- 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. carl <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 >>unknown). > > 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 CEO CHECKMi v/f (usa) 908 322 8715 www.CHECKMi.com Semantically Smart Compendiums (AOL) IM CarlCHECKMi
Received on Wednesday, 20 October 2004 15:01:30 UTC