- From: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
- Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2013 19:04:50 +0100
- CC: SKOS <public-esw-thes@w3.org>
On 9/3/13 6:55 PM, Thomas Francart wrote:
>
> Your issue is that the tools you've used are rather accustomed to hierarchical vocabularies. They can't tell from the data whether it's a flat list or a hierarchical thesaurus, where one would have expected to find top concepts.
>
>
> In such a case, and as a first approximation, this simple SPARQL query can tell you whether a given ConceptScheme contains hierarchical information or not :
>
> PREFIX skos:<http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#>
> ASK {
> ?concept skos:broader|skos:narrower ?another .
> ?concept skos:inScheme <http://www.exemple.com/myConceptScheme> .
> }
>
> If this query returns false, a tool could tell that a ConceptScheme contains a flat list and not a hierarchical taxonomy.
>
Yes, what I meant by
"They can't tell from the data whether it's a flat list or a hierarchical thesaurus, where one would have expected to find top concepts."
is that the tool (or the SPARQL) query can't tell whether the lack of hierarchical data represents a normal situation (ie it's a flat list/terminology) or whether its a type of vocabulary that is supposed to have a hierarchy but happens to be buggy. In the latter case the validation step makes sense. In the former case it has not much interest. But the tool can't tell itself.
Antoine
Received on Tuesday, 3 September 2013 18:05:21 UTC