- From: Christophe Dupriez <christophe.dupriez@destin.be>
- Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 12:01:00 +0100
- To: Alistair Miles <alimanfoo@googlemail.com>
- CC: Tom Morris <tfmorris@gmail.com>, Jakob Voss <jakob.voss@gbv.de>, SKOS <public-esw-thes@w3.org>
Hi Alistair! Saying that SKOS display is not SKOS business sounds strange to me: If I want "pure" "unhuman" data, I go toward SQL, XML or OWL. If I want "human consumable data", I go toward SKOS, HTML (or SGML!). Ordering for human consumption is a must. If you read french: http://www.askosi.org/ULB17.pdf (slide 8) Please let an ol'timer say that being able to associate a simple numerical value to a Concept to improve sorting in trees (local sort) has proven enough in practice for all applications I met. In theory, it would be better to add this value to the Broader relation (Narrowers are generally deducted from broaders). Going further than a simple value linked to concepts can be justified by theoretical examples but probably only very rare examples from "production-level" systems. I propose to go further with the simple solution in a "community extension" to SKOS (I wrote you separately about this). Additional property "sortKey" to Concept. If numerical XSD type, numerical sort; if alphabetical: alphabetical sort; if other ordered data type: sort along that data type. Label in the user language are then used as a second sort key (and as a primary one when there is no sortKey for the Concept). Idea: the sortKey could also be a reference to an orderedCollection: this would mean, if you need to sort this Concept, use its place in this orderedCollection (and not another as a Concept can be in many collections) Have a very nice day! Christophe Le 20/01/2011 11:31, Alistair Miles a écrit : > So I'm sure everyone's aware of this already, but as a bit of history, > this discussion bears on the issue: > > http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/wiki/SKOS/Issues/ConstructionOfSystematicDisplaysFromGroupings > > ...which was issue 84 from the SWDWG [1]. I just looked back at the text of > our resolution at the time, which was: > > """ > 2008-07-01: [rrs] RESOLVED: Postpone ISSUE-84 as (a) constructing such displays > does not require changes in the SKOS vocabulary, (b) Diego's proposal [2] > demonstrates that some form of implementation is feasible, and (c) we don't > have much time to investigate further. (per Antoine's message of 1 July > [1]. [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jul/0001.html > [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jan/0164.html > """ > > I.e., I think we said that defining some orderings that enable you to generate > a systematic display of a thesaurus or classification scheme was at least > *possible* using just skos:OrderedCollection, and Diego demonstrated an > implementation, but we knew this wasn't an ideal solution, and would need > further work. > > We were also aware that the algorithm needed isn't the simplest thing in the > world. It gets a bit gnarly if you have nested collections. You also have to > account for poly-hierarchy in the broader/narrower graph, which can be done, > but isn't immediately obvious. > > I also remember us somewhere else (sorry, can't find a reference off-hand) > saying that conveying presentation information - how to lay out a systematic > display, for example - was not in scope for the original version of SKOS, > which is why we postponed the issue. > > I think I always imagined that either you'd (1) use skos:OrderedCollection and > figure out the algorithm that allows this information to be used to augment > a tree display built directly from the skos:broader/skos:narrower RDF graph, > or (2) represent your systematic display using some other data format (some > sort of XML would be ideal, as you get hierarchy and ordering easily), in > which case you'd have to figure out how to manage your systematic display > data in addition to your basic broader/narrower graph and make sure the two > weren't inconsistent, or (3) use some sort of notation coding or sort key > (which again you'd have to manage and make sure was consistent with your > broader/narrower graph). > > I'm not an expert on the details of systematic displays, but I could > imagine you might need to invent a separate XML language to represent all > the possibilities, and that that might be worth doing separately from SKOS > (as a sort of companion). > > Cheers, > > Alistair > > [1] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/84 > > On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 12:37:10PM -0500, Tom Morris wrote: >> On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 8:32 AM, Jakob Voss<jakob.voss@gbv.de> wrote: >>> "this SKOS scheme should be sorted alphabetically by >>> skos:hiddenLabel": >> Alphabetically according to what collating sequence? The publisher's? >> The consumer's? Some globally mandated collating sequence? >> >> Tom >>
Received on Thursday, 20 January 2011 11:01:32 UTC