RE: [proposal] skos:denotes - a use case?

Nice use case.

But don't you want to use 'skos-map:exactMatch' for this?

---
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 Charles
> McCathieNevile
> Sent: 29 September 2004 19:06
> To: public-esw-thes@w3.org
> Subject: [proposal] skos:denotes - a use case?
> 
> 
> 
> I have a use case. I think it would be helpful to have the proposed
> "skos:denotes" (or whatever you call it) property, to deal with it:
> 
> The W3C glossary [1] collects terms from each specification, 
> and describes
> them as a SKO thesaurus. Terms like "user agent" appear in 
> many specs, and
> the W3C glossary models the occurences in each spec as a 
> seperate concept.
> That is, there is a concept described in UAAG by the 
> term/label "user agent"
> and a different concept described in the SVG spec by the term 
> "user agent",
> according to the glossary.
> 
> Sidar has a group that tries to translate a number of specs 
> into spanish (and
> other iberoamerican languages). To help with this we have a 
> glossary [3]. We
> plan to produce our glossary as a skos thesaurus. But we plan 
> to model the
> concept identified by "user agent" in SVG and in UAAG as the 
> same concept (so
> it will have the same definition, preferred label, etc, 
> making it easy to
> look up how it has been used in different translations).
> 
> Sidar doesn't have the authority to change the W3C glossary. 
> We feel it would
> be a little anti-social to simply publish RDF saying that one 
> concept defined
> by W3C is the same as another one.
> 
> But we could say that
> 
> W3C's concept in SVG called "user agent" and W3C's concept in 
> UAAG called
> "user agent" both denote the Sidar concept called "aplicación 
> de usuario"
> (and that the inverse is true) if we have the proposed property.
> 
> (Later, either side can decide that the other model is 
> better, and change to
> it. But there is no process for coordinating this today, and I want to
> publish a translation before I think I can organise the process of
> coordination and agreeing to a single model).
> 
> Does this make sense?
> 
> cheers
> 
> Chaals
> 
> Charles McCathieNevile  http://www.w3.org/People/Charles  
> tel: +61 409 134 136
> SWAD-E http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/Europe         fax(france): 
> +33 4 92 38 78 22
>  Post:   21 Mitchell street, FOOTSCRAY Vic 3011, Australia    or
>  W3C, 2004 Route des Lucioles, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France
>

Received on Wednesday, 29 September 2004 18:12:08 UTC