- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 15:11:32 -0400 (EDT)
- To: "Miles, AJ (Alistair) " <A.J.Miles@rl.ac.uk>
- Cc: public-esw-thes@w3.org
On Wed, 29 Sep 2004, Miles, AJ (Alistair) wrote: > >Nice use case. > >But don't you want to use 'skos-map:exactMatch' for this? That feels a bit like declaring things about their vocabulary. If I say that my:A skosM:exactMatch their:B and their:C then the explanation is that you can substitute one for the other. This is transitive, so I am saying you can substitute B for C in queries and statements. Whereas if I have skos:denotes to say they describe something that has an unspecified sameness, but doesn't authorise direct substitution, then I can describe queries that should work across skos:denotes relations (one by one if I choose to differentiate things that don't make sense across the two models), without merging the two graphs. cheers Chaals >> -----Original Message----- >> Subject: [proposal] skos:denotes - a use case? ... >> 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.
Received on Wednesday, 29 September 2004 19:11:32 UTC