- From: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 12:11:32 -0400
- To: public-esw-thes@w3.org
Apologies if this topic has already been raised - the archives are longer than I can completely review at the moment, and a few minutes of search did not turn up a similar comment. 1) SemanticRelation sounds more to me like a class of properties than a property. It's name also does not read similarly to the other properties. Compare concept1 is narrrower than concept2, concept1 is broader than concept 2, concept1 is semanticRelation concept2. Also, what is a "non-semantic" relationship. Is a SemanticRelation simply any relation between two concepts? If so, this reinforces that SemanticRelation is a class. 2) Assuming A and B are concepts, if A skos:broader than B which of the following are true? a) It is never the case that A skos:related B b) it is always the case that A skos:related A c) It is sometimes the case that A skos:related A If skos:related is meant to be any associative relation between two concepts, then I would propose that it be made a superproperty of skos:broader and skos:narrower. Because of the inverse relationship between skos:broader and skos:narrower, if we had skos:related as the superproperty, we would have the following situation: A skos:broader B => B skos:narrower A A skos:broader B => A skos:related B B skos:narrower A => B skos:related A giving the correct symmetric relationship. Summary: If skos:SemanticRelation is replaced with skos:related, the names of the properties are closer to the usage of their names in english. One can also remove the undesirable "This property should not be used directly, but as a super-property for all properties denoting a relationship of meaning between concepts", which I have found is often a signal of something amiss. Regards, Alan
Received on Sunday, 18 June 2006 16:11:40 UTC