Re: R: UNESKOS Vocabulary and 2nd SKOS version of UNESCO Thesaurus

Dears Armando and Osma

Thank you very much for your observations.

Osma, sorry, but we don't want to change anything about SKOS. We don't
require any SKOS changes. I don't know the reason why you say that. Can you
explain me? The UNESKOS vocabulary refers to an vocabulary for and specific
case that can be used for others thant find useful our work. *Your
affirmation that we want to change SKOS is absolutely false.* Our work
complements SKOS, but doesn't replace it. SKOS should continue as is to
remain SIMPLE as you think.

I think that define a specific vocabulary that *complements* SKOS and
ISO-THES is not forbidden (as far as I remember) and this restriction is a
kind of dogmatism that goes against the very essence of the Semantic Web.
And I don't like it.

UNESKOS is designed to complement SKOS and ISO-THES. It isn't an
alternative. If fact, if you get the SKOS dataset for the UNESCO Thesaurus
and ignore all the statements that have any UNESKOS property the SKOS
representations is acording to SKOS and ISO-THES. Certainly, the dataset
have been tested with Skosify.

The question is: Really, it's necessary a vocabulary that define inverses
for several SKOS properties?

In my opinion, we must not forget that Linked Data remains the Web and I
think that the Information Architecture principles for SKOS dataset are
applicable (and useful). Please, as we note in the reference document:
don't think that a SPARQL Endpoint it's always avalaible.

Think in the home page of a web site that no have links to continue the
navigation to the inside contents. The lack the properties from the Concept
Schemes to the Concept Groups (that are intended for represent
micro-thesaurus) is the same.

Please take a wider view and *don't think only in terms of SPARQL*, think
in terms of information architecture of the dataset so that it can be
reused in other ways to increase interoperability.

So, please, think about a scenario in which you don't have an SPARQL
Endpoint to query the dataset. An example for this: the HTML version of a
vocabulary with RDFa markup that include the RDF statements of the SKOS
dataset into the HTML markup. The Concise Bound Description doesn't useful
in this case because implies needless and artificial HTML code.

One case: From a iso-thes:ConceptGroup (or micro-thesaurus): How can we
reach to the top concepts without using SPARQL and applying the
SKOS/ISO-THES properties only?

In one word: impossible. So this is the meaning of uneskos:hasMainConcept
and uneskos:mainConceptOf: Access points to continue (or start) to navigate
the hierarchical structure of the thesaurus.

Even more: How can we reach from skos:ConceptScheme to
iso-thes:ConcepGroup. Impossible, because iso-thes:microThesaurusOf goes on
inverse way. So this is the meaning of uneskos:hasMicroThesaurus.

The uneskos:memberOf solves the discovery of the Collection/ConceptGroup to
which a concept belong without use SPARQL.

Repect uneskos:contains. Well, with a depply reading of the reference
document you can find:

NOTE: It is not necessary the inclusion of uneskos:contains property
between the Concept Schemes and the Concepts in the SKOS dataset. In the
context of a well designed KOS, it is possible to find a path to any
Concept of the KOS starting from the Concept Scheme and the Top Concepts.
However, SKOS does not provide any element to discover (i.e.) the
Collections of a KOS from the Concept Scheme. The property uneskos:contains
covers this need.

This is because the first SKOS version of the UNESCO Thesaurus includes
statement like this:

<Collection> skos:inScheme <Concept_Scheme>

And the uneskos:contains property is intended for:

<Concept_Scheme> skos:contains <Collection>

Best regards,
Juan


2015-09-16 13:36 GMT+02:00 Osma Suominen <osma.suominen@helsinki.fi>:

> Hi Juan!
>
> My first reaction was the same as Armando's 2nd point, i.e. some of your
> extensions (namely unesco:contains and unesco:memberOf) are extensions of
> core SKOS with no inherent relationship to the UNESCO Thesaurus.
>
> There are certainly arguments about whether properties should be defined
> in both directions or not. In this case SKOS has decided to make only one
> way relationships (at least in these two cases, skos:inScheme and
> skos:member) and you now want to change that by introducing the inverse
> properties as well. You can certainly do that for your own thesaurus but I
> think that sticking to the SKOS properties would be simpler for everyone.
> In SPARQL and most RDF toolkits it is not very difficult to follow property
> paths in either direction.
>
> -Osma
>
>
>
> On 16/09/15 11:57, Armando Stellato wrote:
>
>> Dear Juan,
>>
>> just a couple of notes.
>>
>> 1.Why the word “main” adopted in some property names? I don’t find any
>> rationale for the use of “main” as the concepts do not seem to be “main”
>> at all for the related schemes/collections.
>>
>> 2.Some properties, more than being targeted at a special domain (e.g.
>> UNESCO), seems plain extensions of the core SKOS, aiming at filling some
>> gaps left by it. However in some cases I feel like these gaps were left
>> by purpose. E.g. the uneskos:contains provides an inverse property for
>> skos:inScheme. Think about a 30.000 concepts thesaurus (for which there
>> exists at least a scheme containing all concepts). If you were using the
>> UNESKOS vocabulary, you surely would try a SPARQL DESCRIBE on this main
>> scheme? ;-)
>>
>> a.Use of SPARQL (or -1 expressions in DL) does not strictly require for
>> the presence of named inverse properties for everything. So, why do they
>> exist? Because when you get the description (for example by a DESCRIBE,
>> but not limited to that) of a resource, they can provide nice “resumes”
>> for it. The kind of path you want to realize (see the description of
>> hasMainConcept) can be performed without the strict need of the
>> property. It is up to SKOS browsing tools to allow for that
>> visualization/traversal options.
>>
>> Just my two cents on that,
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Armando
>>
>> *Da:*Juan Antonio Pastor Sánchez [mailto:pastor@um.es]
>> *Inviato:* mercoledì 16 settembre 2015 02:21
>> *A:* public-esw-thes@w3.org
>> *Oggetto:* UNESKOS Vocabulary and 2nd SKOS version of UNESCO Thesaurus
>>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> I want to communicate the publication Vocabulary UNESKOS that
>> complements certain aspects of SKOS [1] and ISO-THES [2]. This
>> vocabulary is designed in the context of the proposed UNESKOS, more
>> specifically for the SKOS representation of the UNESCO Thesaurus.
>>
>> The document describing the vocabulary is available at:
>>
>>   * http://skos.um.es/TR/uneskos
>>
>> The RDF vocabulary is available for download and use from the UNESKOS
>> namespace:
>>
>>   * http://purl.org/umu/uneskos# <http://purl.org/umu/uneskos>
>>
>> Likewise, the 2nd SKOS version of the UNESCO Thesaurus is available at:
>>
>>   * http://skos.um.es/unescothes
>>
>> Includes following features:
>>
>>   * Persistent and Dereferenceable URIs.
>>   * Turtle and RDF/XML Datasets avalaible for download.
>>   * RDFa markup.
>>   * SPARQL Endpoint.
>>   * Content negotiation avalaible in N3, JSON-LD, etc...
>>
>> This second version makes use of SKOS, ISO-THES and UNESKOS. Along the
>> coming weeks new features navigation within the HTML version will be
>> added.
>>
>> Please, for any suggestion or correction you can contact me.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Juan
>>
>> --
>>
>> Juan Antonio Pastor Sánchez, Ph.D.
>> Dep. of Information and Documentation
>> Faculty of Communication and Documentation
>> University of Murcia
>> phone: +34 868 88 7252
>> http://webs.um.es/pastor
>> pastor@um.es <mailto:pastor@um.es>
>>
>>
>
> --
> Osma Suominen
> D.Sc. (Tech), Information Systems Specialist
> National Library of Finland
> P.O. Box 26 (Kaikukatu 4)
> 00014 HELSINGIN YLIOPISTO
> Tel. +358 50 3199529
> osma.suominen@helsinki.fi
> http://www.nationallibrary.fi
>
>


-- 
Dr. Juan Antonio Pastor Sánchez
Dep. de Información y Documentación
Facultad de Comunicación y Documentación
Universidad de Murcia
Tel: +34 868 88 7252
http://webs.um.es/pastor
pastor@um.es

Juan Antonio Pastor Sánchez, Ph.D.
Dep. of Information and Documentation
Faculty of Communication and Documentation
University of Murcia
phone: +34 868 88 7252
http://webs.um.es/pastor
pastor@um.es