- From: Miles, AJ \(Alistair\) <A.J.Miles@rl.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2005 15:50:03 -0000
- To: "Charles McCathieNevile" <charles@sidar.org>
- Cc: <public-esw-thes@w3.org>
Hi Chaals, > Please don't change the URIs. Give them clearer labels and > descriptions if > you think the human-readable stuff currently doesn't help much. > > (I have yet to meet a change of URI that struck me as > anything but a bad > idea :-( Yeah, I agree with this. I'm just thinking that folks will at least initially see this stuff in the raw so to speak, so will see 'skos:Collection' all over the place, and may not like it. So I was just thinking that if we do want to make a change, now is the time. Incidentally, what the change would mean: - add skos:WhateverGetsChosen etc. - deprecate skos:Collection etc. - add OWL equivalence and DC is-replaced-by statements linking the old & new vocab. But I'd be happy to leave skos:Collection etc. as is, and maybe add 'Concept array' as an alt-label. Could also add a comment about equivalence to BS8723 notion of 'array'. > I think coining new URIs for something is a bad move, since > it focusses > attention on the wrong aspects of RDF (the syntax, rather > than the model). > Plus it means people need to keep collecting information > about new names > for old rope. Yup. But these sorts of issues can make a difference. And given that the biggest anticipated user community for SKOS Core (library science) uses 'collection' to mean something totally different ... well, should I be worrying about this? Cheers, Al.
Received on Friday, 4 February 2005 15:50:35 UTC