- From: Antoine Isaac <Antoine.Isaac@KB.nl>
- Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 15:39:52 +0200
- To: "Alistair Miles" <a.j.miles@rl.ac.uk>, <public-esw-thes@w3.org>
Hello all, > Food for thought... Ouch ;-) > My current favourite solution to this problem is to go back to the > idea of modelling types of note as classes. A single property (e.g. > "skos:annotation") then links concepts to notes, and another single > property (e.g. "skos:annotatesLiteral") can link a note to literals > that are labels for some concept. E.g. ... > Isn't that transferring to the annotations the complexity the "Terms-as-classes" solution was blamed for? > I also would favour dropping the use of rdf:value, and have different > properties for alternate media type values of the annotation content, > e.g. "skos:noteContentText" "skos:noteContentXHTML" > "skos:noteContentMathML" "skos:noteContentSSML" etc. [Just a trivial note: in that case, don't forget to create an umbrella property like for skos:noteContent for all these things, that might be useful to attach new media notes] > This framework is then flexible enough to allow extension by > refinement to achieve the translation and abbreviation requirements. > E.g. a third party could declare ... > > eg:C a skos:Concept; > skos:prefLabel "peace"@en, "rust"@nl. > skos:altLabel "repose"@en, "serenity"@en, "rusten"@nl, "sereniteit"@nl; > skos:annotation [ > a x:TranslationNote; > x:translationSource "repose"@en; > x:translationTarget "rusten"@nl; > ]; > skos:annotation [ > a x:TranslationNote; > x:translationSource "serenity"@en; > x:translationTarget "sereniteit"@nl; > ]. > I see 2 possible problems: - one obvious is the complexity of the thing for the humans involved in the loop. Of course we always claim that this is not the core of semantic web concerns, but a model which is cognitively inadequate will be difficult to adopt. - then you might have problems in creating proper the data and using it in reasoning engines. What if you want state that your translation is symmetric (if X has Y as a translation, Y has X as a translation)? You cannot do it with OWL, so you would have to create all links explicitly when the model is created. Similar problems could happen if you want to create transitive 'links' between your terms (perhaps not valid for translation in general, but this situation might happen somewhere else). Of course you can wait for generic rule languages to be implemented and adopted, but the solution with OWL properties between terms as instances would be so easier... Notice that the solution you propose for this translation process is actually very similar to statement reification mechanisms in RDF. And these can be useful, but are not often used in practice, perhaps because of these complexity issues. OK, that was for the criticism. But one has to acknowledge that it is sure that this solution *can* represent the information, without changing SKOS Core as it is now. Sigh... Cheers, Antoine
Received on Wednesday, 31 May 2006 13:40:17 UTC