- From: Jakob Voss <jakob.voss@gbv.de>
- Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 13:21:40 +0200
- To: public-esw-thes@w3.org
Hi,
It seems to me that RDF is a step backwards compared to plain XML if you
want to rely on the order of elements - but maybe it's just its
complexity and lack of tools like we already have them for XML.
Anyway: In classification schemes the order of narrower concepts is
almost always fixed. How do you preserve this order in SKOS? For RDF
semantics this:
<skos:Concept>
<skos:narrower rdf:resource="#A"/>
<skos:narrower rdf:resource="#B"/>
</skos:Concept>
is equivalent to
<skos:Concept>
<skos:narrower rdf:resource="#B"/>
<skos:narrower rdf:resource="#A"/>
</skos:Concept>
and you'll probably get the "wrong" order if you rely on it. That's what
Alistair suggested at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-esw-thes/2005Dec/0026
as far as I understand him:
<skos:Concept>
<skos:narrower>
<skos:OrderedCollection>
<skos:memberList rdf:parseType="Collection">
<skos:element rdf:resource="#A"/>
<skos:element rdf:resource="#B"/>
<skos:memberList>
</skos:OrderedCollection>
</skos:narrower>
</skos:Concept>
Pretty much overhead, isn't it?
Additionally Collection are also used for arrays (and should also be
used for auxilary tables according to my guide), so there is confusion
about when a collection is used for ordering only and when it is a
special element in the concept scheme.
So why can't we use something like:
<skos:Concept>
<rdf:Seq>
<skos:narrower rdf:resource="#B"/>
<skos:narrower rdf:resource="#A"/>
<rdf:Seq>
</skos:Concept>
or
<skos:Concept>
<skos:narrower>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="#A"/>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="#A"/>
</skos:narrower>
</skos:Concept>
or even better:
<skos:Concept rdf:preserveorder="yes">
<skos:narrower rdf:resource="#A"/>
<skos:narrower rdf:resource="#B"/>
</skos:Concept>
But this is probably all no valid RDF.
Greetings,
Jakob
P.S: The real purpose of RDF is to blow up you data with tons of
additional markup, isn't it? ;-)
Received on Thursday, 10 August 2006 11:22:02 UTC