- From: Alistair Miles <alistair.miles@zoo.ox.ac.uk>
- Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2008 18:50:01 +0000
- To: public-swd-wg@w3.org, public-esw-thes@w3.org
Dear all, I've been trying to collect my thoughts on issues 71 and 74. Here's where I've got to so far. === Background === Antoine's email of the 17 Feb [1] discusses both issue 71 and issue 74, and proposes resolutions to both. This email contains an argument for a fundamental distinction between "paradigmatic" versus "mapping" relations based on notions of authority and semantic commitment, and hence for parallel vocabularies. Antoine's first email of 19 Feb [2] makes a new proposal for resolution of issue 71, based on the argument of 17 Feb. Antoine's second email of 19 Feb][3] makes a new proposal for resolution of issue 74, again based on the argument of 17 Feb. [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Feb/0062.html [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Feb/0076.html [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Feb/0077.html === Preamble === First, a point of pedantry. "Paradigmatic" is used in BS 8723-2 to denote links that are inherent in the meaning of the linked concepts. The idea in SKOS was always that broader, narrower and related, whether used within a concept scheme or between concept schemes, denote links between concepts which are inherent in the meaning of the linked concepts. Therefore, broader, narrower and related mapping links are just as "paradigmatic" as broader, narrower or related links within a concept scheme. Below, I use "intra-scheme links" to mean broader, narrower or related links between concepts in the same scheme, and I use "inter-scheme links" to mean broader, narrower or related links between concepts in different schemes. === Discussion === If we are going to have separate, parallel vocabularies in SKOS for intra-scheme versus inter-scheme links, then I want to make sure we have clear, sound and valid reason(s) for doing so. Note especially that no analogous pattern is present in OWL, and therefore we need to justify our different approach. Let me start by trying to restate Antoine's position on intra-scheme links, as points A-E below: A. The activity of constructing a concept scheme is typically carried out by a single authority. This activity results in, among other things, a set of intra-scheme links between the concepts of the scheme. The properties skos:broader, skos:narrower and skos:related should be used by such an authority to represent these intra-scheme links. B. Because the properties skos:broader, skos:narrower and skos:related are used, for the most part, by an authority as described above, then they can in general be relied upon to carry a certain degree of authority, without needing to question the provenance of any graph in which they are used. C. The activity of constructing a concept scheme generally follows a well-defined methodology, and is carried out by a single authority in support of a known application. Therefore, the intra-scheme links between concepts can generally be relied upon to carry a certain degree of semantic soundness or intellectual consistency. D. Because the properties skos:broader, skos:narrower and skos:related are used, for the most part, to represent intra-scheme links that result from such an activity, then they can in general be relied upon to carry a certain degree of semantic soundness or intellectual consistency, without needing to question the provenance of any graph in which they are used. E. The properties skos:broader, skos:narrower and skos:related may be used in other ways, however because they are mostly used as described above, then they can be trusted to, in general, represent intra-scheme links with a relatively high degree of authority and intellectual soundness or consistency, without needing to question the provenance of any graph in which they are used. Let me now try to restate Antoine's position on inter-scheme links, as points F-H below: F. The activity of constructing a mapping between two concept schemes is typically carried out by a single authority, which differs from the authorities who were responsible for developing each individual scheme. Such an activity results in a set of inter-scheme links between the concepts of the two schemes. The properties skos:broadMatch, skos:narrowMatch, skos:relatedMatch and skos:exactMatch should be used to represent these inter-scheme links. G. Because the properties skos:broadMatch, skos:narrowMatch, skos:relatedMatch and skos:exactMatch are used, for the most part, as described above, they cannot in general be relied upon to carry the authority of either party responsible for the construction of the individual concept schemes. H. Although the activity of constructing a set of mapping links between schemes might follow a well-defined methodology, the process is fundamentally different from the process of constructing links between concepts within a scheme, because the mapping authority has no control over the scope or organisation of each of the mapped schemes, and therefore has to cope with a wide variety of content and structure. Therefore, links that result from such an activity are generally more variable, less intellectually consistent or sound, than are links which result from the construction of a concept scheme. I. Because the properties skos:broadMatch, skos:narrowMatch, skos:relatedMatch are used, for the most part, to represent inter-scheme links which result from such an activity, they generally carry a lower degree of semantic soundness or intellectual consistency than do skos:broader, skos:narrower and skos:related. J. The properties skos:broadMatch, skos:narrowMatch, skos:relatedMatch may be used in other ways, however because they are mostly used as described above, then they can be trusted to, in general, represent inter-scheme links with a relatively low degree of authority and intellectual soundness or consistency, without needing to question the provenance of any graph in which they are used. === My Position === Let us consider the ways in which links between concepts might differ. There are links which are "authoritative", and there are links which are not. There are links which are well-engineered and intellectually sound, and there are links which are not. There are links which span concept schemes, and there are links which do not. These are three orthogonal dimensions. There is also, of course, a fourth dimension of basic paradigmatic meaning, i.e. whether the link is broader, narrower or related, which is again orthogonal to the first three. Antoine's position, as stated above, is that skos:broader and skos:broadMatch share the same paradigmatic meaning, however skos:broader is typically (but not always) intra-scheme, more authoritative and more intellectually consistent, whereas skos:broadMatch is typically (but not always) inter-scheme, less authoritative and less intellectually consistent. This is quite a load for each of these properties to carry. My concern is that, in practice, neither of these properties (skos:broader, skos:broadMatch) can be relied upon to carry anything other than their basic, paradigmatic meaning, and that therefore, in practice, they are at best redundant, and at worst misleading. To use an analogy, if SKOS were a security-critical technology, then any application which relied on a fundamental difference between skos:broader and skos:broadMatch would have a serious vulnerability. Authority depends on provenance, as does trust in intellectual soundness. As a general design principle, I say that no property should ever be expected to carry greater authority or trust than another property, because such an expectation cannot be supported in practice. Authority and trust can only be conveyed, via provenance, outside the graph. Kind regards, Alistair. -- Alistair Miles Senior Computing Officer Image Bioinformatics Research Group Department of Zoology The Tinbergen Building University of Oxford South Parks Road Oxford OX1 3PS United Kingdom Web: http://purl.org/net/aliman Email: alistair.miles@zoo.ox.ac.uk Tel: +44 (0)1865 281993
Received on Friday, 22 February 2008 05:44:35 UTC