- From: Leonard Will <L.Will@willpowerinfo.co.uk>
- Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2008 12:03:21 +0100
- To: public-esw-thes@w3.org
It seems to me that confusion about "broaderTransitive" and "narrowerTransitive", especially their being wider in meaning than "broader" and "narrower", arises from their being given inappropriate names. Calling a relationship "broaderTransitive" appears to say something which restricts the nature of the relationship, whereas it seems to be being used in SKOS just to say something about the concepts which can be related by it. Am I right in thinking that on the analogy of direct relationships being expressed as "parent / child", the idea that "broaderTransitive / narrowerTransitive" tries to express is "ancestor / descendant" ? If this is the case, then it is clear that "broaderParent" is a specific case of "broaderAncestor", and these names would be less confusing. If you don't like them, how about "broaderIndirect" for "broaderAncestor", leaving "broader" on its own to express "broaderParent", for which it has generally been used in thesauri? I still find "A broader B" to be ambiguous, and would like to see it expressed as "hasBroaderConcept" to avoid confusion with "isBroaderConceptOf". These would appear quite neatly as "hasBroaderParent" and "hasBroaderAncestor" or even "hasParent" and "hasAncestor". Similarly for narrower . . . Leonard Will -- Willpower Information (Partners: Dr Leonard D Will, Sheena E Will) Information Management Consultants Tel: +44 (0)20 8372 0092 27 Calshot Way, Enfield, Middlesex EN2 7BQ, UK. Fax: +44 (0)870 051 7276 L.Will@Willpowerinfo.co.uk Sheena.Will@Willpowerinfo.co.uk ---------------- <URL:http://www.willpowerinfo.co.uk/> -----------------
Received on Sunday, 8 June 2008 11:04:56 UTC