- From: Ron Davies <ron@rondavies.be>
- Date: Wed, 03 Aug 2005 20:41:11 +0200
- To: "Houghton,Andrew" <houghtoa@oclc.org>,<public-esw-thes@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.2.20050803202011.01bdbc40@pop.bgc.be>
At 15:15 3/08/2005, Houghton,Andrew wrote: >A thesaurus management system could be built using SKOS as the underlying >model, >so I don't necessarily agree that it wouldn't be good practice to >produce/maintain >a thesaurus in SKOS. Yes, you could build a thesaurus management system (TMS) using SKOS as the underlying data model. However-- and I don't know why it always has to be me that points this out ;-( -- but a TMS built on SKOS would not comply with BS8723, since there is no way to associate data elements such as history note, source, definition, editorial note, etc. with a non-descriptor/non-preferred term. While the last draft of the revised ANSI standard is largely silent on this point, Figure 18 clearly shows source information being recorded about synonyms for a candidate term in AAT, so this is not just a British invention ;-). As Mark points out, this doesn't mean that SKOS isn't very good for other things like interoperability. However I can say that there are simple, practical and (in some environments at least) compelling reasons why you would want to record and manage this kind of information in a TMS. Ron Ron Davies Information and documentation systems consultant Av. Baden-Powell 1 Bte 2, 1200 Brussels, Belgium Email: ron(at)rondavies.be Tel: +32 (0)2 770 33 51 GSM: +32 (0)484 502 393
Received on Wednesday, 3 August 2005 18:42:21 UTC