- From: Miles, AJ (Alistair) <A.J.Miles@rl.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 13:10:20 -0000
- To: 'Thomas Baker' <thomas.baker@bi.fhg.de>
- Cc: "'public-esw-thes@w3.org'" <public-esw-thes@w3.org>
Hi Tom, all, > I'm not so sure... The draft DCMI Abstract Model [1] defines > "term" to be "The generic name for a property..., vocabulary > encoding scheme, syntax encoding scheme, or concept taken from > a controlled vocabulary (concept space)". Then it defines > "term URI" as "The generic name for a URI reference that > identifies a term". In other words, it makes a distinction > between a modeling entity and the identifier for that modeling > entity. It occurs to me that 'concept space' might be a better name for what SKOS Core currently calls a 'concept scheme'. Any thoughts on this? Just to mention this again, when I originally wrote about the 'terms of the SKOS Core vocabulary' in the guide and the spec I was following the DCMI conventions as Tom describes above. This does seem to be at odds with the RDF conventions described below - which suggests to me that we should look for (or usurp :) some new vocabulary for talking about our RDF thingies. Cheers, Al. > > In contrast, the definitions of "RDF term" in RDF Semantics > and the SPARQL draft imply that the identifier _is_ the > modeling entity (not an identifier _for_ the modeling entity). > What you are saying, then, implies to me that an "RDF term" > (a URI) is not quite the same as a "DCMI term" (a conceptual > entity identified by a URI). > > What, then, is a term in the SKOS vocabulary? Reading on...: > > > The SKOS vocabulary then, is a set of such entities... > > Do you mean to say that a SKOS vocabulary is a set of URIs? > > Would this mean that the DCMI use of "term" is at odds with > the RDF/SKOS use of "term"?? > > > Since RDF uses URIs as > a way to identify > > the things it relates, it is an easy shorthand in many > cases to consider that > > the URIs are themselves the things. > > Or is the RDF/SPARQL/SKOS way of putting things simply an > example of such a shorthand? And that in reality, an RDF > vocabulary really _is_ a set of terms identified by URIs. > Assure me this is the case and I will provide you beer by > the case! > > > In many cases the > distinction doesn't > > matter, but in some it does. > > Or does it even really matter? Convince me that it really, > really does not matter and I will provide two cases! :) > > Tom > > [1] http://dublincore.org/documents/abstract-model/ > > -- > 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 Tuesday, 18 January 2005 13:10:58 UTC