W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-esw-thes@w3.org > April 2014

RE: SKOS comment - How to better explain why skos:broader is not transitive

From: Johan De Smedt <johan.de-smedt@tenforce.com>
Date: Sat, 5 Apr 2014 13:02:46 +0200
Message-ID: <CAAYHZKq9fjGrN7WnBq3EMMUxYgp9oEiUdB5W333rv27F4Bg1gQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: vladimir.alexiev@ontotext.com
Cc: SKOS <public-esw-thes@w3.org>
Hi Vladimir,

If we consider that broader/narrower a transitive among concepts of the
same concept scheme only asserts the existence oh a hierarchical path, then
Sofia broader transitive Bulgaria is not meaningless.
Though I agree it misses more clear semantic details between the linked
concept. That more semantic expressiveness is to be handled using dedicated
ontologies.

Johan
On Apr 5, 2014 1:37 AM, "Vladimir Alexiev" <vladimir.alexiev@ontotext.com>
wrote:

> > why skos:broader is not  transitive
>
> Ok, good explanation.
>
>
> But who can explain why skos:broaderTransitive is not always appropriately
> transitive?
>
> E.g. iso-thes:broaderPartitive and iso-thes:broaderInstantial should not
> compose.
> E.g. Sofia is part of Bulgaria; Bulgaria is an instance of Country, but
> Sofia has no relation to Country whatsoever.
>
> But iso-thes:broaderPartitive and iso-thes:broaderInstantial are declared
> subprops of skos:broader,
> and skos:broader feeds unconditionally into skos:broaderTransitive.
> So it infers Sofia skos:broaderTransitive Country, which is meaningless.
>
> Cheers! Vladimir
>
>
>
Received on Saturday, 5 April 2014 11:03:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:46:36 UTC