RE : When did SKOS namespace change, and why?

Hi Thomas, Bernard,

The decision to change the namespace was made very recently, http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/117

Actaully I'd like to thank Thomas for giving such a good reason for us changing the namespace ;-)

The class TopConcept has been deprecated for ages, and should not be used anymore. That's the kind of problem you get with keeping the namespace and changing its content, either adding axioms or deprecating constructs... People do actually think they can still use the old stuff, or using stuff that still exists but that has changed semantics, without getting punished for it.

I'm afraid this is the downsize of evolving standard. And believe me, in my project we also have to re-write all our conversion scripts, so I'm also paying the price for this new namespace...

Cheers,

Antoine


-------- Message d'origine--------
De: public-esw-thes-request@w3.org de la part de Thomas Bandholtz
Date: mar. 17/06/2008 08:07
À: Bernard Vatant
Cc: SKOS
Objet : Re: When did SKOS namespace change, and why?
 

Hi Bernard,

2008/05/skos is not downwards compatible with 2004/02/skos!
E.g.skos:subject is discontinued, and there is no class TopConcept any more.

So you shouldn't just change a namespace without considering the need of 
further changes in structure, if you want to do so.

I'm not really sure about "any solid reason for such a change", I only 
see this has not been guided by a wise versioning policy :-)
This raises the question if we would need some guidelines for Ontology 
governance.

Anyway, http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core# still is a cool uri!
You don't have to change anything.

Best, Thomas

Bernard Vatant schrieb:
>
> Hi all
>
> Reading through the latest draft dated 9 June 2008 at 
> http://www.w3.org/TR/skos-reference/
> The SKOS namespace URI is now http://www.w3.org/2008/05/skos#,
> whereas in the previous versions it was 
> http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#
> The latter has been used extensively by applications and published 
> vocabularies, which will have to be changed to be conformant to the 
> new namespace.
> Was there any solid reason for such a change?
>
> Thanks!
>
> Bernard
>
>


-- 
Thomas Bandholtz, thomas.bandholtz@innoq.com, http://www.innoq.com 
innoQ Deutschland GmbH, Halskestr. 17, D-40880 Ratingen, Germany
Phone: +49 228 9288490 Mobile: +49 178 4049387 Fax: +49 2102 77160-1