- 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