- From: Mark van Assem <mark@cs.vu.nl>
- Date: Fri, 03 Nov 2006 10:16:16 +0100
- To: Bernard Vatant <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>
- CC: public-esw-thes@w3.org
Hi,
> Well I'm not sure what you mean exactly by an "off-line conversion of
> the ontology to SKOS", and as said above, I'm not even sure if such an
> expression makes sense at all. First it sounds like you're thinking
> there is a single and systematic way to convert OWL to SKOS, and I
hope
No, that's not what I meant.
> it's not the case. Second, it would lead folks to think that SKOS and
> OWL are just two languages to model the same things differently, which
> IMO is plainly wrong. Actually I hope the ongoing SKOS standardization
The problem you are having is twofold:
1- two different ways to model the world (backoffice/front: one in
terms of stars, another in terms of hotel quality)
2- two different languages to describe domain models (OWL/SKOS: one as
a formal class hierarchy, another in loose broader/narrower hierarchy)
I am suggesting that problem 1 has nothing to do with problem 2; they
are orthogonal. To solve problem 1, you need domain specific rules to
convert information from one domain model to the other (from stars to
quality). You can:
- specify rules in some programming language that convert at runtime
- specify rules in RDF that get interpreted at runtime
To solve problem 2 you probably can use some static rules but like you
suggest might need some specific ones like you seem to be doing
(relating a SKOS concept to specific classes, instances,...)
With my "offline" remark I was suggesting that whatever solutions to 1
and 2 you have in place now, you can do the conversions from the OWL
data (backend) to the SKOS model (frontend) at "design time" (e.g.
once a day on your server), not at "runtime" (e.g. each time a query
about a Hotel comes in).
Hope I'm still making sense...
Mark.
--
Mark F.J. van Assem - Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
markREMOVE@cs.vu.nl - http://www.cs.vu.nl/~mark
Received on Friday, 3 November 2006 09:17:07 UTC