Re: [SKOS]: [ISSUE 44] BroaderNarrowerSemantics

On Dec 17, 2007 4:22 PM, Daniel Rubin <rubin@med.stanford.edu> wrote:
> Sorry, but I disagree with the suggestion that people define
> transitivity for themselves. SKOS should not leave such things
> undefined--to do so guarantees people will have different semantics
> for SKOS properties which will prevent interoperability.

I appreciate this point Daniel. Can you provide a concrete example of
how interoperability would be disrupted?

//Ed

Received on Monday, 17 December 2007 21:30:21 UTC