- From: Osma Suominen <osma.suominen@helsinki.fi>
- Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2014 09:07:01 +0300
- To: public-esw-thes@w3.org
On 30/03/14 11:15, Christophe Dupriez wrote: > In this precise case, I would model whatever is needed using the most > suitable vocabularies available if any. > And I would add (automatically if possible) SKOS relations to guide the > documentary retrieval engine. > I.e. I would model without constraints something ontologically "rock > solid" and then derive a "publishing" structure using SKOS. +1 for this approach from me too. This is what we are doing with the Finnish Spatio-Temporal Ontology SAPO [1]. The ontology itself is modelled using OWL, and has two main classes, time-bound places (similar in spirit to "Crimea after Russian annexation in 2014") and time-independent places (e.g. "Crimea", "Ukraine"). The relations between time-independent and time-dependent places are modelled separately - the current idea is to use the CHANGE vocabulary [2] to model the events (establishment, merge, split etc) that form the time series, but other representations for the representation including a simple part-of/includes property have been used in the past. For publishing purposes, a SKOS representation is derived, simply by defining rdfs:subClassOf and rdfs:subPropertyOf relationships that map the classes and properties of the ontology to a simplified SKOS view. The conversion itself is implemented using the Skosify tool [3]. Of course, SPARQL construct queries could have been used here as well, though Skosify does some additional validation and enrichment on the conversion result. -Osma [1] http://www.seco.tkk.fi/ontologies/sapo/ [2] http://www.linkedearth.org/change/ns/ [3] http://code.google.com/p/skosify/ -- Osma Suominen D.Sc. (Tech), Information Systems Specialist National Library of Finland P.O. Box 26 (Teollisuuskatu 23) 00014 HELSINGIN YLIOPISTO Tel. +358 50 3199529 osma.suominen@helsinki.fi http://www.nationallibrary.fi
Received on Tuesday, 1 April 2014 06:07:32 UTC