- From: Jakob Voss <jakob.voss@gbv.de>
- Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2006 15:26:44 +0100
- To: public-esw-thes@w3.org
Antoine Isaac wrote: > PS: Jakob and Bernard, when you talk about SKOS simplicity, don't > forget that SKOS specification (and therefore proper use of SKOS) > sometimes rely on OWL-like features like property transitivity > ('characteristic' of [1]) and even rules that are simple but out of > OWL scope ('comment' in [2]) > > [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-swbp-skos-core-spec-20051102/#broader > [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-swbp-skos-core-spec-20051102/#subject I still think you can have SKOS without OWL and inference (if you want). OWL is only used to define logical characteristics of the properties as * Transitive (owl:TransitiveProperty) * Symmetric (owl:SymmetricProperty) * InverseFunctional (owl:InverseFunctionalProperty) Furthermore most properties have an inverse property (owl:inverseOf) 1. Transitivity skos:broader and skos:narrower are defined as transitive. In my point of view this is just an error of design in SKOS because if you inference the transitivity rule, your full tree of concepts gets expanded. This is not suitable for common retrieval tasks where you only want to expand to a certain depth (please correct me if I am wrong). Your application needs to expand skos:broader and skos:narrower depending on rules that are independet from OWL anyway. 2. Symmetric and inverse properties If you get data in SKOS you should *always* normalize it by checking and adding inverse properties[*]. This could be done with SPARQL: PREFIX skos: <http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#> PREFIX owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#> CONSTRUCT { ?x ?p1 ?y } WHERE { ?y ?p2 ?x. ?p1 owl:inverseOf ?p2 } For this action you don't have to know anything about OWL. owl:inverseOf is just a property that is identified by an URI. Maybe OWL is needed for subjectIndicators because of owl:InverseFunctionalProperty but normally you don't need the full complexity of OWL to work with SKOS. Greetings, Jakob [*] Because in practise (meta)data is always dirty and people with always find ways to not use it in the way it was intended for.
Received on Monday, 13 November 2006 14:27:21 UTC