- From: Thomas Baker <thomas.baker@bi.fhg.de>
- Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 16:02:24 +0100
- To: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
- Cc: Leonard Will <L.Will@willpowerinfo.co.uk>, SKOS <public-esw-thes@w3.org>, Stella Dextre Clarke <sdclarke@lukehouse.demon.co.uk>, Alan Gilchrist <cura@fastnet.co.uk>, Ron Davies <ron@rondavies.be>
On Thu, Jan 13, 2005 at 05:57:15PM -0500, Charles McCathieNevile wrote: > A 3 beer bounty for a SKOS version... And a 10 beer bonus for one that > includes the details of making it into SKOS. .. > >I have put up a glossary of terms relating to thesauri, faceted > >classification and related topics at > ><http://www.willpowerinfo.co.uk/glossary.htm>. Leonard, With SKOS-compatibility in mind, one point of possible confusion catches my eye: the term "term". In the glossary, "term" is defined as a "word or phrase used to identify a concept". In SKOS, however, a "term" is a member of the SKOS vocabulary -- it is a "class or property". In SKOS, the class or property is "identified" with a URI and associated with words or phrases called "labels". Saying in the glossary that a term is a "word or phrase used to _label_ a concept" would seem to be one step closer to SKOS -- and perhaps even without sacrificing clarity, because "identity" per se is not otherwise discussed in the glossary (though the notion of a descriptor as a term which "represents" a concept could be construed to be about identification) [1]. The ambiguity about "term" is mirrored in the definition of "mapping", which talks about establishing relationships among "terms, notions or concepts" across two vocabularies, and in the definition of "target vocabulary," which is defined first in terms of "terms" and then in terms of "concepts". This ambiguity seems confusing. Could one not say that mapping is something that is done between concepts -- even if those concepts are "represented" by descriptors (i.e., terms)? Finally, the terms "vocabulary" and "language" are not themselves defined in the glossary. These problems could perhaps be addressed with careful wording. However, I'm not sure much can be done to avoid the terminology clash between a thesaurus "term" (a natural-language label, which may sometimes also be a descriptor identifying a concept) and an SKOS "term" (a concept, or unit of thought, identified with a URI and labelled with natural-language "labels"). Both uses of "term" are fundamental to their respective communities. "Term" is perhaps one of those words that is doomed to have multiple functions -- e.g. even in the title: a "Glossary of terms...". Tom [1] The definition of "vocabulary control" would also need to replace "identify" with "label". -- Dr. Thomas Baker Thomas.Baker@izb.fraunhofer.de Institutszentrum Schloss Birlinghoven mobile +49-160-9664-2129 Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft work +49-30-8109-9027 53754 Sankt Augustin, Germany fax +49-2241-144-2352 Personal email: thbaker79@alumni.amherst.edu
Received on Saturday, 15 January 2005 15:00:43 UTC