- From: Thomas Baker (E-mail) <thomas.baker@BI.FHG.DE>
- Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 16:40:21 +0100
- To: Mark van Assem <mark@cs.vu.nl>
- Cc: "Miles, AJ (Alistair)" <A.J.Miles@rl.ac.uk>, "'public-esw-thes@w3.org'" <public-esw-thes@w3.org>
On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 10:55:31AM +0100, Mark van Assem wrote: > Using the word "refinement" for extensions in terms of sub-props and > sub-classes sounds fine (i.e. not ambiguous) to me personally. I agree that "refinement" is fine for sub-properties and sub-classes, as long as it is clear that this substitution does not really address my point about "extensibility"... Tom > > Mark. > > >However I use the words 'extending' and 'extensible' as buzzwords for > >talking about SKOS Core, because this feature of RDF (i.e. 'extension' via > >sub-prop & sub-class) is a major selling point for SKOS Core. It means > >that > >SKOS Core can be a standard representation framework for KOS that doesn't > >break when you try to represent slightly quirky KOS. You get > >interoperability without having to sacrifice flexibility. People in the > >KOS > >community respond very well to this feature I have found. > > > >Not sure what to do about this to avoid the potential ambiguity Tom > >describes. > > > >Cheers, > > > >Al. > > > > -- > Mark F.J. van Assem - Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam > mark@cs.vu.nl - http://www.cs.vu.nl/~mark > -- 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 Thursday, 27 January 2005 15:38:22 UTC