- From: Stephen Bounds <km@bounds.net.au>
- Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2008 23:43:30 +1000
- To: Simon Spero <ses@unc.edu>
- CC: Antoine Isaac <Antoine.Isaac@KB.nl>, SKOS <public-esw-thes@w3.org>
G'day Simon, I understand what you're saying, but that is not really my objection. If someone wants to implement a polyhierarchical thesaurus, then this kind of structure is quite common: Animals | | Birds | \ | \ | Australian Birds | | | | | | Cockatoos Emus If <skos:broader> is non-transitive, then there is a single, unambiguous way to represent this hierarchy. But if <skos:broader> is transitive, then asserting Cockatoos skos:broader Birds does *not* tell us whether the author intends a direct link between Cockatoos and Birds in the hierarchy. Now, from a semantic reasoning point of view, the presence or absence of this parent-child link is irrelevant: 'Birds' is broader than 'Cockatoos' in either case. But it's *not* irrelevant in terms of how the thesaurus gets presented to an end-user, and that's precisely my point. Regards, -- Stephen. Simon Spero wrote: > Stephen- > If you aren't using a reasoner, then you don't need to start doing so to > introspect and undo the effects of using... a reasoner. > > If you are working with an rdf suite like Redland, and don't hook it up > to an inference engine, you just get the direct assertions. > > You don't have to draw every conclusion entailed by ones knowledge base; > the black lump lying on my feet is ki-chan. I do not need to access the > fact that he is a eukaryote to know he's being friendly because he wants > second breakfast; I only need to know that he's a cat. > > It's when you *publish* data that you need to take care not to use > hierarchical relations in cases where the link is not truly hierarchic. > > Simon > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Jul 31, 2008, at 5:22 AM, Stephen Bounds <km@bounds.net.au> wrote: > >> >> Hi Antoine, >> >> Yes, I am in favour of the current SKOS version. >> >> I strongly believe SKOS is most likely to see broad uptake if people >> *don't* need SPARQL or some other RDF query dialect to do useful >> things with it. >> >> Cheers, >> >> -- Stephen. >>
Received on Thursday, 31 July 2008 13:44:18 UTC