- From: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
- Date: Thu, 08 Jul 2010 15:01:22 +0200
- To: Quentin Reul <quentin.reul@tenforce.com>
- CC: public-esw-thes@w3.org
Quentin, > Antoine/Alistair, > > Thanks for your answers. > > I have one more question wrt the integrity of SKOS dataset. The SKOS > Reference states that skos:prefLabel, skos:altLabel and skos:hiddenLabel > are all disjoint. This leads inconsistencies when skos:prefLabel and > skos:altLabel and/or skos:hiddenLabel have the same value for a given > language. The reference also states that no concept can have 2 > skos:prefLabel for the same language. > > Suppose now that I have two SKOS concepts as follows: > > <A> skos:prefLabel "stringA"@en; > skosxl:altLabel<C> . > > <B> skos:prefLabel "stringB"@en; > skosxl:altLabel<C> . > > <C> rdf:type skosxl:Label ; > skosxl:literalForm "stringC"@en . > > Would this be consistent? Yes. According to the SKOS-XL semantics this leads to both A and B having "stringC" as skos:altLabel. Which is allowed. Cheers, Antoine > > Kind regards, > > Quentin > > -----Original Message----- > From: Alistair Miles [mailto:alimanfoo@googlemail.com] > Sent: donderdag 8 juli 2010 12:53 > To: Quentin Reul > Cc: public-esw-thes@w3.org > Subject: Re: SKOS Consistency > > Hi Quentin, > > On Tue, Jul 06, 2010 at 10:47:09AM +0200, Quentin Reul wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> I was looking at the SKOS reference [1] and I was unable to determine >> whether a SKOS model would be consistent if no skos:hasTopConcept >> property was defined within a concept scheme. > > Just adding a general comment to Antoine's nice reply, the open world > assumption which is part of the RDF and OWL semantics means that an > absence of some data cannot give rise to inconsistency. > > I.e., you can only become inconsistent by saying things (and contradicting > yourself), not by forgetting to say something. > > Checking for "missing" data is, however, very useful in some > circumstances. E.g., if you have a file which you know is supposed to > contain all the data for a complete thesaurus, you might then check to see > if any concepts are missing a prefLabel in some language. In this case, > your check effectively assumes a closed world. This is a perfectly > reasonable thing to do, but this type of checking is beyond the scope of > the SKOS reference. > > I.e., the SKOS reference *will* tell you if your data is inconsistent (in > an open world). It *will not* tell you if your data is missing anything, > because how you define missingness is up to you, and you will want to vary > your definition depending on what you're trying to achieve. > > Hth, > > Alistair > >> >> Cheers, >> >> Quentin >> >> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/skos-reference >> >> -- >> Quentin Reul >> >> Semantic Technology Consultant >> TenForce BVBA >> Haachtsesteenweg 378 >> 1910 Kampenhout >> Belgium > > -- > Alistair Miles > Centre for Genomics and Global Health<http://cggh.org> The Wellcome Trust > Centre for Human Genetics Roosevelt Drive Oxford > OX3 7BN > United Kingdom > Web: http://purl.org/net/aliman > Email: alimanfoo@gmail.com > Tel: +44 (0)1865 287669 > >
Received on Thursday, 8 July 2010 13:01:57 UTC