Re: AW: How to use notations from classification schemes in SKOS

Hi,

You probably already dismissed this possibility, but why is creating a 
subproperty of skos:prefLabel [1] not a valid solution?

Cheers,
Mark.

[1]http://isegserv.itd.rl.ac.uk/cvs-public/~checkout~/skos/drafts/appextensions.html?rev=1.7#hExSpecLabelling

Svensson, Lars wrote:
> In litteris suis de Montag, 13. Februar 2006 14:45, Danny Ayers
> <mailto:danny.ayers@gmail.com> scripsit:
> 
> 
>>On 2/13/06, Svensson, Lars <svensson@dbf.ddb.de> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Classification schemes like the Universal Decimal Classification,
>>>MCS, or PACS usually have two human-readable labels: One containing a
>>>notation (usually a combination of digits and letters following a
>>>specific syntax, so that it's possible to see super-/subclass
>>>relationships and ideally to identify precoordinated notations), the
>>>other one being kind of free-format text only. Both labels are
>>>intended for human use.
>>
>>For the (potentially) machine-readable label the info: URI scheme may
>>offer a possible approach.
>>
>>http://info-uri.info
>>
>>It seems to me that mapping between the relationship definitions and a
>>SKOS representation would have to be per-scheme, so it might make
>>sense to keep the mapping separate from the naming. With info: you
>>could assign (SKOS-opaque) URIs to the terms, then label & describe
>>relationships using SKOS (the whole lot could perhaps be generated on
>>the fly programmatically based on the existing sheme, but from the
>>RDF/OWL viewpoint it'd all be declarative).
>>
> 
> Errr, well yes. Maybe my quest wasn't quite clear. What I need is not
> any kind of identifier, but a label. An example: the class 025.43 in the
> Dewey Decimal Classification has the caption "General classification
> systems". I want to express "General classification systems" AND
> "025.43" as human-readable labels. Something like
> 
> [ns declarations omitted]
> ddc:025.43 rdfs:type skos:Concept ;
> 	skos:prefLabel "General classification systems"@en ;
> 	skos:notation "025.43" .
> 
> Of course the notation is implicit from the identifier, but don't we
> need something explicit, too, even if it's in a way redundant?
> 
> Lars
> 

-- 
  Mark F.J. van Assem - Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
        markREMOVE@cs.vu.nl - http://www.cs.vu.nl/~mark

Received on Monday, 13 February 2006 14:46:11 UTC