- From: Miles, AJ \(Alistair\) <A.J.Miles@rl.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 15:08:21 +0100
- To: "Mark van Assem" <mark@cs.vu.nl>
- Cc: <public-esw-thes@w3.org>
I agree, this practice (i.e. using dcterms:audience) should be explained in the Guide with an example. N.B. the range of the note properties explicitly left empty to allow for the three usage patterns. Cheers, Al. > -----Original Message----- > From: Mark van Assem [mailto:mark@cs.vu.nl] > Sent: 01 July 2005 12:56 > To: Miles, AJ (Alistair) > Cc: public-esw-thes@w3.org > Subject: Re: [Proposal][SKOS-Core] public/private notes > > > Hi Alistair, > > So from the vocabulary itself it would not be clear that we > intend the > properties to be used like that, because the range of the note > properties will be empty? > > I don't know how important this is to make clear in the change > proposal (could be done by just including your example), but at any > rate it should be explained in the Guide how this works. > > Cheers, > Mark. > > Miles, AJ (Alistair) wrote: > >>The reason is clear, but how would the proposed new solution look > >>like? Each note-property refers to a blank node, which > itself has two > >>props linking the actual note and the dcterms:audience? (I suspect > >>that's what you mean with "(where the note is represented as > >>a related > >>resource description or a document reference)." > > > > > > Yep, if you wanted to specify the audience of a note, you > would do e.g.: > > > > foo:x a skos:Concept; > > skos:definition [ > > rdf:value 'foo bar.'; > > dcterms:audience 'public'; > > ]; > > . > > > > Cheers, > > > > Al. > > > > > >>Mark. > >> > >> > >>Miles, AJ (Alistair) wrote: > >> > >>>This proposal opened: > >>> > >>>http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core/proposals#notes-2 > >>> > >>>How does that look? > >>> > >>>Cheers, > >>> > >>>Al. > >>> > >>> > >>>--- > >>>Alistair Miles > >>>Research Associate > >>>CCLRC - Rutherford Appleton Laboratory > >>>Building R1 Room 1.60 > >>>Fermi Avenue > >>>Chilton > >>>Didcot > >>>Oxfordshire OX11 0QX > >>>United Kingdom > >>>Email: a.j.miles@rl.ac.uk > >>>Tel: +44 (0)1235 445440 > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>>-----Original Message----- > >>>>From: public-esw-thes-request@w3.org > >>>>[mailto:public-esw-thes-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Miles, AJ > >>>>(Alistair) > >>>>Sent: 14 June 2005 14:59 > >>>>To: Houghton,Andrew > >>>>Cc: public-esw-thes@w3.org > >>>>Subject: RE: [Proposal][SKOS-Core] public/private notes > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>Hi Andy, > >>>> > >>>>Yes, this is exactly what I had in mind :) > >>>> > >>>>Al. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>-----Original Message----- > >>>>>From: Houghton,Andrew [mailto:houghtoa@oclc.org] > >>>>>Sent: 13 June 2005 19:03 > >>>>>To: Miles, AJ (Alistair); public-esw-thes@w3.org > >>>>>Subject: RE: [Proposal][SKOS-Core] public/private notes > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>From: public-esw-thes-request@w3.org > >>>>>>[mailto:public-esw-thes-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Miles, > >>>>>>AJ (Alistair) > >>>>>>Sent: 13 June, 2005 12:32 > >>>>>>To: public-esw-thes@w3.org > >>>>>>Subject: [Proposal][SKOS-Core] public/private notes > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>Hi all, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>b) Re the discussion of public versus private notes, I > >>>>>> > >>>>>>agree you can't > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>lay this down from above. For example, definitions > >>>> > >>>>could be made > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>>>public for one audience, private for another. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>I propose that the skos:publicNote and skos:privateNote > >>>>>>properties be deprecated, and replaced by a single property > >>>>>>e.g. 'skos:note'. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>The audience of a note may then be specified by using the > >>>>>>dcterms:audience property. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>Any objections to me opening this as a proposal on > >>>>>>http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core/proposals > >>>>> > >>>>>Currently in the 10 May 2005 draft these properties have a > >>>> > >>>>hierarchy: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>skos:publicNote > >>>>> skos:definition > >>>>> skos:scopeNote > >>>>> skos:example > >>>>> skos:historyNote > >>>>> > >>>>>skos:privateNote > >>>>> skos:editorialNote > >>>>> skos:changeNote > >>>>> > >>>>>So it sounds like your proposal is to change the hierarchy to: > >>>>> > >>>>>skos:note > >>>>> skos:definition > >>>>> skos:scopeNote > >>>>> skos:example > >>>>> skos:historyNote > >>>>> skos:editorialNote > >>>>> skos:changeNote > >>>>> > >>>>>I'm also assuming that skos:note will allow you to make > >>>>>additional note types, just like publicNote and privateNote > >>>>>did. In addition, if you want to specify dcterms:audience, > >>>>>then you will have to use the second (documentation as a > >>>>>related resource description) method. > >>>>> > >>>>>If I understand the proposal correctly, then I feel this > >>>>>would be a positive change. In looking at SKOS in relation > >>>>>to the DDC, we have struggled with SKOS note types, since > >>>>>there are well over 100 different note types in DDC with > >>>>>varying degrees of "public-ness" or "private-ness" for > >>>>>licensees and translators. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>Andy. > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>-- > >> Mark F.J. van Assem - Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam > >> mark@cs.vu.nl - http://www.cs.vu.nl/~mark > >> > > > > > > -- > Mark F.J. van Assem - Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam > mark@cs.vu.nl - http://www.cs.vu.nl/~mark >
Received on Friday, 1 July 2005 14:11:54 UTC