RE: [PORT] SKOS Core 2nd review: notes-2

This change done, logged at:

http://esw.w3.org/mt/esw/archives/000140.html

Cheers,

Al.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-esw-thes-request@w3.org
> [mailto:public-esw-thes-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Miles, AJ 
> (Alistair)
> Sent: 29 September 2005 16:10
> To: public-esw-thes@w3.org; public-swbp-wg@w3.org; Mark van Assem
> (E-mail); Ralph Swick (E-mail)
> Subject: [PORT] SKOS Core 2nd review: notes-2
> 
> 
> 
> Re: change proposal notes-2 [1]
> 
> N.B. this proposal requires the following changes to the SKOS 
> Core RDF/OWL description:
> 
> remove statements
> {
> skos:definition rdfs:subPropertyOf skos:publicNote.
> skos:example rdfs:subPropertyOf skos:publicNote.
> skos:scopeNote rdfs:subPropertyOf skos:publicNote.
> skos:historyNote rdfs:subPropertyOf skos:publicNote.
> skos:changeNote rdfs:subPropertyOf skos:privateNote.
> skos:editorialNote rdfs:subPropertyOf skos:privateNote.
> }
> 
> add statements
> {
> skos:publicNote a owl:DeprecatedProperty;
>   dct:isReplacedBy skos:note.
> 
> skos:privateNote a owl:DeprecatedProperty;
>   dct:isReplacedBy skos:note.
> 
> skos:note a rdf:Property;
>   rdfs:label 'note'@en;
>   skos:definition 'A general note, for any purpose.'@en;
>   rdfs:comment 'This property may be used directly, or as a 
> super-property for more specific note types.'@en;
>   skos:example 
> <http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core/examples/note.rdf.xml>;
>   rdfs:isDefinedBy <http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core>;
>   vs:term_status 'unstable';
>   dct:issued '2005-09-29';
>   dct:replaces skos:privateNote;
>   dct:replaces skos:publicNote;
> .
> 
> skos:definition rdfs:subPropertyOf skos:note.
> skos:example rdfs:subPropertyOf skos:note.
> skos:scopeNote rdfs:subPropertyOf skos:note.
> skos:historyNote rdfs:subPropertyOf skos:note.
> skos:changeNote rdfs:subPropertyOf skos:note.
> skos:editorialNote rdfs:subPropertyOf skos:note.
> }
> 
> N.B. this proposal also requires redrafting of the section 
> 'Documentation Properties' from the SKOS Core Guide [2].
> 
> Mark [3] hasn't raised any objections to this change, 
> although he has noted that the question of audience and 
> function overlapping possibly arises for the properties 
> skos:historyNote, skos:changeNote and skos:editorialNote.  
> Discussion of this issue is beyond the scope of the current review.
> 
> Ralph [4] hasn't raised any objections to this change.  Some 
> responses to his comments below:
> 
> > Rationale is clear.  Do you intend to add examples to the 
> > specification,
> > similar to that in [6]?  I expect this will be a FAQ.  (You 
> did write
> > in a followup to that thread that you would add those 
> examples, though
> > the change proposal doesn't make that clear.)  Perhaps that 
> is what is
> > meant by the sub-proposal to add dcterms:audience example.  
> I suspect
> > that it would be wise to circulate that example to the mailing list
> > for comment.
> 
> I intended to draft a section of prose for the SKOS Core 
> Guide asap and circulate for comment.
> 
> > I observe that there is useful clarifying material in the thread
> > about the semantics of editorialNote [7].  I found Stella's
> > citation in [8] informative.  (The [BS8723] reference [9] in the
> > SKOS Core Guide does not give a non-practitioner enough information
> > to locate this document without the aid of, e.g. Google.  I doubt,
> > for example, that many readers would know to what organization "BSI"
> > refers.  Please expand that reference some more.)
> 
> I'll try to incorporate Stella's clarifying material into the 
> new prose for the guide.  Also I'll expand the BSI reference.
> 
> > I worry a bit about the vocabulary management side effects of making
> > such a change to the property hierarchy, but I observe that 
> > implementors
> > were given notice that this area could change as both publicNote and
> > privateNote have status [10] 'unstable' in the 10 May specification.
> > Of necessity, that status should be understood to propagate to
> > subProperties so I think implementers have been given appropriate
> > caution.
> 
> I'm not sure what to say about this.  I think the notion of 
> assigning 'stability' to a class or prop is a reasonable 
> solution for the short term, but issues such as you raise 
> have not been worked out.  Interesting to discuss further, 
> but beyond the scope of the current review (something for VM :).
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Al.
> 
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core/review-2#notes-2
> [2] 
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-swbp-skos-core-guide-20050510/#se
cdocumentation
> [3] 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-esw-thes/2005Aug/0000.html
> [4] 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-esw-thes/2005Sep/0007.html
> [6] 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-esw-thes/2005Jul/0000.html
> [7] 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-esw-thes/2005Aug/0000.html
> [8] 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-esw-thes/2005Aug/0007.html
> [9] 
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-swbp-skos-core-guide-20050510/#refBS8723
> [10] 
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-swbp-skos-core-spec-20050510/#secChange
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: public-swbp-wg-request@w3.org
> > [mailto:public-swbp-wg-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Miles, AJ 
> > (Alistair)
> > Sent: 29 September 2005 14:50
> > To: public-esw-thes@w3.org; public-swbp-wg@w3.org; Mark van Assem
> > (E-mail); Ralph Swick (E-mail)
> > Subject: [PORT] Status of SKOS Core 2nd review
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > I'm going to start wrapping up the second review, taking it 
> > proposal by proposal so the emails don't get too long.
> > 
> > Thanks again to both reviewers for all their hard work.
> > 
> > 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
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
>

Received on Wednesday, 5 October 2005 11:12:53 UTC