- From: Sini, Margherita (KCEW) <Margherita.Sini@fao.org>
- Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 18:34:23 +0100
- To: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
- Cc: SKOS <public-esw-thes@w3.org>, SWD WG <public-swd-wg@w3.org>, Jon Phipps <jphipps@madcreek.com>
Dear all, I would like also to provide my contribution to this interesting discussion: ISSUE-44 (now ISSUE-56) At the beginning, I was thinking as Simon Spero that BT and NT should be transitive. But after reading all the emails about this topic, I now agree which is better not to force the semantic of these relationships. In particular I liked comments from Antoine and Bernard. skos:broader and skos:narrower are of type owl:objectPropety and I think it is possible to keep them generic. Note: we are not saying they are INtransitive, but we just do not further specify. I do not really like the solution of creating new sub-properties skos:broaderTransitive and skos:narrowerTransitive and make them transitive, because this means we may need to have many other cases, and this may go agains the "simplicity" we mention is good to keep in SKOS. But if any specification should be done, this is the correct way to go, I agree. Finally just one comment... maybe I missed something but what are BTP and BTI? Regards Margherita
Received on Monday, 14 January 2008 17:34:38 UTC