- From: Mark van Assem <mark@cs.vu.nl>
- Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2007 18:40:12 +0200
- To: "Miles, AJ \(Alistair\)" <A.J.Miles@rl.ac.uk>
- CC: public-esw-thes@w3.org, SWD WG <public-swd-wg@w3.org>
Hi Alistair, > A disadvantage of this solution is that the class skos:Annotation would > be rather general, with different extensions potentially serving quite > different purposes. How should generic SKOS applications handle this? Maybe providing two subclasses of skos:Annotation for modeling either Relations or Terms provides some support for generic apps to understand the extensions? That immediately provides clues on how to interpret skos:annotation and skos:annotatesLiteral in the two cases. If only the Pattern for N-ary relations [1] had already provided a class for Relation it would have been great to use that. Cheers, Mark. [1]http://www.w3.org/TR/swbp-n-aryRelations/ > Cheers, > > Alistair. > > [1] > <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2007Mar/0092.html> > > >> Cheers, >> Mark. >> >>> The first example I gave (animals/fauna) was meant to illustrate how > a >>> "terms-as-classes" representation can be defined as an extension of > my >>> proposal [1]. >>> >>> The second example I gave (Corporation/Corp. - which you quote > below) >>> was meant to illustrate how an "n-ary relations" representation can > be >>> defined an extension of my proposal [1]. I.e. the second example had >>> nothing to do with "terms-as-classes". >>> >>> Does that clarify? >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> Alistair. >>> >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Mark van Assem [mailto:mark@cs.vu.nl] >>>> Sent: 20 March 2007 12:07 >>>> To: Miles, AJ (Alistair); public-esw-thes@w3.org >>>> Subject: Re: [SKOS] Proposed Resolution for ISSUE 26: >>>> RelationshipBetweenLabels >>>> >>>> Hi Alistair, >>>> >>>> Why is terms-as-classes an extension of [1]? The whole idea of >>>> terms-as-classes is that properties can be made between the >>>> term-classes (i.e. between two URIs), while [1] assigns no >>>> URI to them >>>> but simply repeats the literal. If the range of >>>> abbreviatedForm were a >>>> resource (URI) instead of a literal, then I would agree that they > are >>>> equivalent (but still not an extension). >>>> >>>> ex:A a skos:Concept; >>>> skos:prefLabel "Corporation"@en; >>>> skos:altLabel "Corp."@en; >>>> skos:annotation [ >>>> a ex:AbbreviationRelation; >>>> ex:abbreviatedForm "Corp."@en; >>>> ex:fullForm "Corporation"@en; >>>> ]. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Mark. >>>> >>>> [1]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd- >> wg/2007Mar/0092.html >>>> Miles, AJ (Alistair) wrote: >>>>> As a point of interest, note that a representation following the >>>>> "terms-as-classes" pattern can actually be defined as an >>>> *extension* of >>>>> my proposal at [1]. Guus' proposal [3] (which follows the "n-ary >>>>> relations" pattern) can *also* be derived as an extension of [1]. >>>>> >>>>> This demonstrates that it is not a simple "either-or" >>>> choice between the >>>>> "terms-as-classes" and "n-ary relations" patterns described at > [2]. >>>>> There is a solution [1] from which both approaches may be derived > as >>>>> extensions. >>>>> >>>>> Example "terms-as-classes" extension ... >>>>> >>>>> --- Begin Turtle --- >>>>> >>>>> @prefix ex: <http://www.example.com/example#>. >>>>> # skos: rdfs: rdf: xsd: conventional namespace prefixes >>>>> >>>>> # Define the extension >>>>> >>>>> ex:ThesaurusTerm rdfs:subClassOf skos:Annotation. >>>>> ex:preferredTerm rdfs:subPropertyOf skos:annotation; >>>>> rdfs:range ex:ThesaurusTerm. >>>>> ex:nonPreferredTerm rdfs:subPropertyOf skos:annotation; >>>>> rdfs:range ex:ThesaurusTerm. >>>>> ex:literalValue rdfs:subPropertyOf skos:annotatesLiteral; >>>>> rdfs:domain ex:ThesaurusTerm. >>>>> >>>>> # Apply extended vocabulary >>>>> >>>>> ex:A a skos:Concept; >>>>> skos:prefLabel "animals"@en; >>>>> skos:altLabel "fauna"@en; >>>>> ex:preferredTerm [ >>>>> a ex:ThesaurusTerm; >>>>> ex:literalValue "animals"@en; >>>>> ]; >>>>> ex:nonPreferredTerm [ >>>>> a ex:ThesaurusTerm; >>>>> ex:literalValue "fauna"@en; >>>>> ]. >>>>> >>>>> --- End Turtle --- >>>>> >>>>> Example "n-ary relations" extension ... >>>>> >>>>> --- Begin Turtle --- >>>>> >>>>> @prefix ex: <http://www.example.com/example#>. >>>>> # skos: rdfs: rdf: conventional namespace prefixes >>>>> >>>>> # Define the extension >>>>> >>>>> ex:LabelRelation rdfs:subClassOf skos:Annotation. >>>>> ex:AbbreviationRelation rdfs:subClassOf ex:LabelRelation. >>>>> ex:labelRelationSubject rdfs:subPropertyOf skos:annotatesLiteral; >>>>> rdfs:domain ex:LabelRelation. >>>>> ex:labelRelationObject rdfs:subPropertyOf skos:annotatesLiteral; >>>>> rdfs:domain ex:LabelRelation. >>>>> ex:hasLabelRelation rdfs:subPropertyOf skos:annotation; >>>>> rdfs:range ex:LabelRelation. >>>>> >>>>> # Apply extended vocabulary >>>>> >>>>> ex:B a skos:Concept; >>>>> skos:prefLabel "Corporation"@en; >>>>> skos:altLabel "Corp."@en; >>>>> ex:hasLabelRelation [ >>>>> a ex:AbbreviationRelation; >>>>> ex:labelRelationSubject "Corporation"@en; >>>>> ex:labelRelationObject "Corp."@en; >>>>> ]. >>>>> >>>>> --- End Turtle --- >>>>> >>>>> Finally, note that the proposal [1] is also a solution to >>>> the issue of >>>>> annotations on labels. >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> >>>>> Alistair. >>>>> >>>>> [1] >>>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2007Mar/0092.html >>>>> [2] >>>>> >>>> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/SkosDesign/RelationshipsBet >>>> weenLabels >>>>> [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2007Feb/0181 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>> From: public-swd-wg-request@w3.org >>>>>> [mailto:public-swd-wg-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Miles, AJ >>>>>> (Alistair) >>>>>> Sent: 19 March 2007 17:42 >>>>>> To: Guus Schreiber; SWD WG >>>>>> Cc: public-esw-thes@w3.org >>>>>> Subject: RE: [SKOS] Proposed Resolution for ISSUE 26: >>>>>> RelationshipBetweenLabels >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I would like to offer an alternative proposal. This proposal >>>>>> is similar >>>>>> to Guus' original proposal [1] with the modification given in > [2]. >>>>>> However, it it slightly more flexible, making less commitment > than >>>>>> [1]+[2]. >>>>>> >>>>>> - Vocabulary >>>>>> >>>>>> skos:Annotation skos:annotation skos:annotatesLiteral >>>>>> >>>>>> - Axiomatic Triples >>>>>> >>>>>> skos:annotation rdfs:range skos:Annotation. >>>>>> skos:annotatesLiteral rdfs:domain skos:Annotation. >>>>>> skos:annotatesLiteral rdfs:range rdfs:Literal. >>>>>> >>>>>> - Additional Semantic Conditions: >>>>>> >>>>>> None. >>>>>> >>>>>> - Consistent Examples: >>>>>> >>>>>> --- Begin Turtle --- >>>>>> >>>>>> @prefix ex: <http://www.example.com/example#>. >>>>>> # skos: rdfs: rdf: conventional namespace prefixes >>>>>> >>>>>> # first extend proposed vocabulary >>>>>> >>>>>> ex:AbbreviationRelation rdfs:subClassOf skos:Annotation. >>>>>> >>>>>> ex:abbreviatedForm rdfs:subPropertyOf skos:annotatesLiteral; >>>>>> rdfs:domain ex:AbbreviationRelation. >>>>>> >>>>>> ex:fullForm rdfs:subPropertyOf skos:annotatesLiteral; >>>>>> rdfs:domain ex:AbbreviationRelation. >>>>>> >>>>>> # now apply extended vocab >>>>>> >>>>>> ex:A a skos:Concept; >>>>>> skos:prefLabel "Corporation"@en; >>>>>> skos:altLabel "Corp."@en; >>>>>> skos:annotation [ >>>>>> a ex:AbbreviationRelation; >>>>>> ex:abbreviatedForm "Corp."@en; >>>>>> ex:fullForm "Corporation"@en; >>>>>> ]. >>>>>> >>>>>> --- End Turtle --- >>>>>> >>>>>> - Inconsistent Examples: >>>>>> >>>>>> None possible. >>>>>> >>>>>> - Entailment Rules >>>>>> >>>>>> None. >>>>>> >>>>>> - Justification >>>>>> >>>>>> This proposal provides a general, extendable, framework >>>> for asserting >>>>>> n-ary relationsips between zero or more literals and zero or more >>>>>> concepts. The commitment is minimal, whilst still >>>> retaining consistent >>>>>> expectations with respect to the domains and ranges of properties >>>>>> involved. >>>>>> >>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>> >>>>>> Alistair. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> [1] > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2007Feb/0181 >>>>>> [2] >>>>>> > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2007Feb/0195.html >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Alistair Miles >>>>>> Research Associate >>>>>> CCLRC - Rutherford Appleton Laboratory >>>>>> Building R1 Room 1.60 >>>>>> Fermi Avenue >>>>>> Chilton >>>>>> Didcot >>>>>> Oxfordshire OX11 0QX >>>>>> United Kingdom >>>>>> Web: http://purl.org/net/aliman >>>>>> Email: a.j.miles@rl.ac.uk >>>>>> Tel: +44 (0)1235 445440 >>>>>> >>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>> From: public-swd-wg-request@w3.org >>>>>>> [mailto:public-swd-wg-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Guus > Schreiber >>>>>>> Sent: 27 February 2007 11:43 >>>>>>> To: SWD WG >>>>>>> Subject: [SKOS] Proposed Resolution for ISSUE 26: >>>>>>> RelationshipBetweenLabels >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ISSUE-26 [1] >>>>>>> RelationshipsBetweenLabels >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Considering that: >>>>>>> - representing lexical labels as classes would >>>>>>> lead to an undesirable complication of SKOS in >>>>>>> straightforward use cases for the application of SKOS, >>>>>>> - representing relationships between labels is >>>>>>> required in some use cases, and therefore an >>>>>>> escape mechanism should preferably be available >>>>>>> for such thesauri, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I propose the WG opts for an amended version of >>>>>>> the second solution proposed in [2]: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> RESOLUTION >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The WG resolves to add the following classes and >>>>>>> properties to the SKOS specification [3]: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - the class skos:LabelRelation >>>>>>> - the properties skos:labelRelationSubject and >>>>>>> skos:labelRelationObject with domain LabelRelation >>>>>>> and range rdfs:literal >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In addition, the SKOS Guide should describe >>>>>>> guidelines for SKOS users to define their label >>>>>>> relations as specializations of LabelRelation and >>>>>>> gives examples of its intended usage. The SKOS >>>>>>> specification refrains for now to predefine >>>>>>> specializations of LabelRelation. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Contrary to the proposal in [2] the class >>>>>>> LabelRelation is not defined as a subclass of >>>>>>> skos:Annotation (which is in any case not yet part >>>>>>> of the spec), as it is not an "annotation", but a >>>>>>> lexical relationship. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [1] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/26 >>>>>>> [2] >>>>>>> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/SkosDesign/RelationshipsBet >>>>>>> weenLabels >>>>>>> [3] http://www.w3.org/TR/swbp-skos-core-spec/ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Computer Science >>>>>>> De Boelelaan 1081a, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands >>>>>>> T: +31 20 598 7739/7718; F: +31 84 712 1446 >>>>>>> Home page: http://www.cs.vu.nl/~guus/ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Alistair Miles >>>>> Research Associate >>>>> CCLRC - Rutherford Appleton Laboratory >>>>> Building R1 Room 1.60 >>>>> Fermi Avenue >>>>> Chilton >>>>> Didcot >>>>> Oxfordshire OX11 0QX >>>>> United Kingdom >>>>> Web: http://purl.org/net/aliman >>>>> Email: a.j.miles@rl.ac.uk >>>>> Tel: +44 (0)1235 445440 >>>>> >>>> -- >>>> Mark F.J. van Assem - Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam >>>> markREMOVE@cs.vu.nl - http://www.cs.vu.nl/~mark >>>> >> -- >> Mark F.J. van Assem - Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam >> markREMOVE@cs.vu.nl - http://www.cs.vu.nl/~mark > > -- > Alistair Miles > Research Associate > CCLRC - Rutherford Appleton Laboratory > Building R1 Room 1.60 > Fermi Avenue > Chilton > Didcot > Oxfordshire OX11 0QX > United Kingdom > Web: http://purl.org/net/aliman > Email: a.j.miles@rl.ac.uk > Tel: +44 (0)1235 445440 > -- Mark F.J. van Assem - Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam markREMOVE@cs.vu.nl - http://www.cs.vu.nl/~mark
Received on Tuesday, 27 March 2007 16:41:09 UTC