RE: Homonyms

Hi Johan,
If the thesaurus follows ISO 2788 (or BS 8723) there will be no
ambiguities. In each case the thesaurus term will be  "tip (advice)",
"tip (gratuity)", "tip (point)", etc. A term such as "tip" or "press"
should not be used without a qualifier, if the vocabulary is to comply
with ISO 2788.
All the best
Stella

*****************************************************
Stella Dextre Clarke
Information Consultant
Luke House, West Hendred, Wantage, Oxon, OX12 8RR, UK
Tel: 01235-833-298
Fax: 01235-863-298
SDClarke@LukeHouse.demon.co.uk
*****************************************************



-----Original Message-----
From: public-esw-thes-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-esw-thes-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Johan De Smedt
Sent: 11 March 2007 17:51
To: public-esw-thes@w3.org
Subject: Homonyms



Hi,

Homonyms are common.  'tip', 'press' or 'bank' are examples. Does SKOS
provide (in a formal way) for an optional qualifier to disambiguate
homonyms in a thesaurus. The full context of a concept may be provided
by such things as a definition or a scope note. However, what I am
looking for is a way to provide a thesaurus user a unique display value,
while
- still using the proper vocabulary for the preferred label
- not having (or being able) to disclose all concept characteristics
(bt, nt, altLabel/uf, rt, notes, ...)

E.g.
- tip (advice)
- tip (gratuity)
- tip (point)

Thanks for clarification.

Kind Regards,
   Johan De Smedt
=================
johan.de-smedt@tenforce.com
=================

Received on Sunday, 11 March 2007 18:32:12 UTC