W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-esw-thes@w3.org > March 2007

RE: Homonyms

From: Stella Dextre Clarke <sdclarke@lukehouse.demon.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2007 18:31:01 -0000
To: "'Johan De Smedt'" <johan.de-smedt@tenforce.com>, <public-esw-thes@w3.org>
Message-ID: <001001c7640b$6e9f73f0$0300000a@DELL>

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 Dextre Clarke
Information Consultant
Luke House, West Hendred, Wantage, Oxon, OX12 8RR, UK
Tel: 01235-833-298
Fax: 01235-863-298

-----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


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,
- 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, ...)

- tip (advice)
- tip (gratuity)
- tip (point)

Thanks for clarification.

Kind Regards,
   Johan De Smedt
Received on Sunday, 11 March 2007 18:32:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:45:39 UTC