Re: how to: ordered collection of a Concept

Johan,
Notations for AAT might not be so straight forward since it does not have a notation system. MeSH does.
Let's think further and discuss more later.
Marcia

Sent from my iPad

> On Nov 9, 2013, at 5:44 PM, "Johan De Smedt" <johan.de-smedt@tenforce.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Marcia
> 
> Thanks a lot for the explanation!
> 
> I am wondering if and how we should advice on ordering.
> - notation is foreseen on both Thesaurus Concept, on Thesaurus Array and on Thesaurus Group.
> - notation is translated to skos:notation
> So that can do the job if it is properly encoded (typically with a convention or with custom data types).
> - The negative remark that could be made is that it is not a RDF or OWL only typing.
>  So it requires Specific know-haw about the notation typing.
>  (Compared to e.g. the rdf:List)
> My personnel evaluation of this criticism would be that it an application knowing to make mixed orders of concepts and arrays needs to understand (distinguish and order) notation types.
> 
> So the ISO 25964 compliant answer to Vladimir would be (my understanding) to use notation/skos:notation and document the used typing and ordering.
> A TMS system should be configurable so
> - the ordering properties can be defined (e.g. language specific pref-label, or notation, or rdfs:label or a combination with priorities)
> - the ordering rules can be applied using the specified ordering (alphabetic, notation conversion + ordering, numeric, date-time, ...).
> 
> Thanks to let me know if my understanding is correct.
> 
> Kind Regards,
> 
> Johan De Smedt 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: ZENG, MARCIA [mailto:mzeng@kent.edu]
>> Sent: Saturday, 09 November, 2013 15:31
>> To: Johan De Smedt; vladimir.alexiev@ontotext.com; public-esw-thes@w3.org
>> Cc: 'Stella Dextre Clarke'; Joan Cobb
>> Subject: RE: how to: ordered collection of a Concept
>> 
>> Hi, all,
>> I may be answering out of the bigger context here. Just my two cents.
>> 
>> 1. Orders of children issue is actually the issue of orders of siblings (the related concepts at the same
>> level). We have raised this issue before to SKOS.
>> 
>> Orders of siblings is necessary in a hierarchical classification system. Usually a notation scheme takes
>> care of it.
>> Any notation has both a semantic value and an ordinal value:
>> The semantic value of a classification number is the subject or concept it stands for, e.g., 610 Medicine
>> (DDC).
>> The ordinal value of a number of code places the subject into its determined rank in the scheme.
>> There are about 10 common ways used to decide the orders of siblings (coordinate classes).
>> 
>> In thesaurus' multilevel formats, the siblings are often only displayed by viewing the broader term. The
>> order of the siblings are not as critical as that in a classification or taxonomy.
>> However in some thesauri, the hierarchies are much deeper than others and the whole thesaurus is
>> highly-structured, such as AAT and MeSH.
>> 
>> 2. A related situation is the not-trully-poly-hierarchical cases. In AAT, one can see a concept always has
>> a preferred parent, while in many cases also an 'additional parent'. So, it is not simply indicating one
>> concept has two parents. It has to indicate which parent is preferred.
>> See example in AAT: ID: 300265026 loutrophoros-hydriae.
>> In TGN: ID: 7010273 Saint Petersburg (inhabited place).
>> (The 'preferred' situation of parents is all coded clearly in the Getty vocabularies. )
>> 
>> Marcia
>> ________________________________________
>> From: Johan De Smedt [johan.de-smedt@tenforce.com]
>> Sent: Saturday, November 09, 2013 4:50 AM
>> To: vladimir.alexiev@ontotext.com; public-esw-thes@w3.org
>> Cc: 'Stella Dextre Clarke'; ZENG, MARCIA
>> Subject: RE: how to: ordered collection of a Concept
>> 
>> Hello Vladimir,
>> 
>> Can you give an example illustrating the problem and approach you make with equivalentArray?
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> 
>> Kind Regards,
>> 
>> Johan De Smedt
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Vladimir Alexiev [mailto:vladimir.alexiev@ontotext.com]
>>> Sent: Friday, 08 November, 2013 16:43
>>> To: public-esw-thes@w3.org
>>> Cc: 'Stella Dextre Clarke'; 'Marcia Zeng'
>>> Subject: how to: ordered collection of a Concept
>>> 
>>> Some AAT *concepts* have ordered children (narrower concepts).
>>> How can one represent this?
>>> - I guess one could put the children in a skos:OrderedCollection that is "free floating" i.e. one that’s
>> not
>>> connected to anything. But TMSes will have a hard time figuring what this pattern means
>>> - iso:ConceptArray allows you to put ordered children *under* a concept by using
>>> iso:subordinateArray
>>> - I propose an extension iso:equivalentArray that puts the array "next" to the concept.
>>> 
>>> What do you think?
> 
> 
>

Received on Sunday, 10 November 2013 00:14:39 UTC