- From: Miles, AJ (Alistair) <A.J.Miles@rl.ac.uk>
- Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 15:01:16 -0000
- To: "'public-esw-thes@w3.org'" <public-esw-thes@w3.org>
(reposting this with helpful subject line) Mark wrote: > I was wondering about the difference between skos:scopeNote and > skos:definition (and also editorialNote/changeNote). Thesauri > in the ISO > 2788 format only have a scope note (i.e. the scope note is the > definition). Their difference may become clearer if an example > containing both a scope note and a definition is included. > Also, people > migrating from an ISO thesaurus need to be aware that their ScopeNotes > should probably be migrated to skos:definition. The intention is that a definition is a 'statement or formal explanation of the meaning of a concept' (i.e. is supposed to be a *complete* explanation of the meaning of the concept) whereas a scope note is a 'note that helps to clarify the meaning of a concept' (i.e. a statement of what the meaning of the concept includes or does not include, but not a complete explanation of the meaning of a concept). In other words, a 'scope note' says something about what is 'in or out of scope' for a particular concept. A definition is supposed to describe (fully) the 'scope' of a concept. This means that, if a concept has a definition, it should not need a scope note (i.e. the two properties should never co-occur). An example of a scope note: Concept [ preferred label: Europe scope note: includes Russia ] An example of a definition: Concept [ preferred label: Europe definition: The sixth-largest continent, extending west from the Dardanelles, Black Sea, and Ural Mountains. It is technically a vast peninsula of the Eurasian land mass. ] Does this usage seem reasonable? A better explanation of this in the guide? Cheers, Al.
Received on Monday, 24 January 2005 15:01:50 UTC