RE: SKOS Guide and owl:sameAs

> From: public-esw-thes-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:public-esw-thes-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Jakob Voss
> Sent: 02 November, 2006 03:56
> To: public-esw-thes@w3.org
> Subject: Re: SKOS Guide and owl:sameAs
> 
> >> I wonder what the relation to the SKOS mapping vocabulary 
> should be.
> >> In the first case:
> >>
> >> Edition 21
> >>   skos:Concept 005.6
> >>      mapping:exactMatch E22 005.18
> >>
> >> Edition 22
> >>   skos:Concept 005.6
> >>      mapping:exactMatch E22 005.18
> > 
> > No real issues here, but ...
> 
> So do you agree that dct:replaces is not meant to replace 
> skos-mapping-relations but there always needs to be a mapping 
> (which you may automatically derive from dct:replaces)?

I think that dct:replaces and dct:isReplacedBy are not meant to
replace skos-mapping-relations.  The two are different, in my
mind, which is why I am not comfortable in using them to describe
the notion of concept relocation and splitting.  An analogy is in
MARC where there are separate fields for concept relocation and
splitting vs. mapping.  The two serve different purposes.  I think
the dct:replaces and dct:isReplacedBy are useful for handling the
concept relocation and splitting issue.

In the above case you could use them interchangeable because there
is a one to one mapping.  But using the skos-mapping-relations
breaks down in the one to many and many to one situation and a
single solution is preferable than using skos-mapping in one
instance and something else in another.


Andy.

Received on Thursday, 2 November 2006 13:58:14 UTC