W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-esw-thes@w3.org > April 2020

Re: SKOS profiles: Simple vs Structured

From: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2020 12:29:07 +0200
To: <public-esw-thes@w3.org>
CC: Robert Sanderson <RSanderson@getty.edu>
Message-ID: <cce8385e-823a-5455-63ec-9115ad03bd5d@few.vu.nl>
Hi Vladimir, all

In case this would still help, I'm very much interested in the topic, especially as I;'m involved in some W3C work on profile. But I guess I won't have time to contribute before a couple of months.

Best,

Antoine

On 01/04/2020 10:46, Vladimir Alexiev wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> Skos is provided in one of two formats (profiles):
> 
>   *
> 
>     Simple (SKOS)
> 
>   *
> 
>     Structured (SKOSXL <https://www.w3.org/TR/skos-reference/#xl>+Advanced Documentation Features <https://www.w3.org/TR/skos-primer/#secadvanceddocumentation> withmetadata/provenance props). "Documentation" means notes, definitions, etc
> 
> It's a common practice to publish "structured" with redundancy, to cater to both "simple" consumers and "structured" consumers:
> 
>   *
> 
>     SKOSXL recommends structured labels to be published redundantly: as plain SKOS labels and as skosxl:Label. Dumbing-Down to SKOS Lexical Labels <https://www.w3.org/TR/skos-reference/#L780>defines how to provide structured and plain labels together.
> 
>   *
> 
>     Not sure about notes, as neither SKOS nor SKOSXL defines a class Note (Getty defines gvp:Note), nor separate properties. So skos:definition and friends would carry both a string and a resource, which will complicate consumption.
> 
> 
> Currently a SKOS dataset or API does not have a way to declare its profile.
> https://github.com/NatLibFi/Skosmos/issues/477 describes some troubles related to this:
> 
>   * Skosmos uses "duplicate label matching logic" to display the label below just once, and assumes label redundancy.
> 
> <concept> skos:prefLabel "foo"@en; skosxl:prefLabel [skosxl:literalForm "foo"@en]
> 
>   * However, there is no similar logic for notes, so it would display labels in duplicate.
> 
> 
> To avoid complicated duplicate matching logic at the consumer, I think we should define two SKOS profiles: simple vs structured.
> 
>   * Should "structured" subsume "simple", i.e. redundantly provide the same strings as simple labels/notes? That will simplify life for data providers
>   * Do we need the two aspects separately: structured labels vs structured notes?
>   *
> 
>     The profile should be communicated:
> 
>       o
> 
>         In HTTP request: client should be able to request "simple" or "structured"
> 
>       o
> 
>         In HTTP response
> 
>       o
> 
>         In the description of ConceptScheme and VOID/DCAT Dataset (property dct:conformsTo)
> 
>   *
> 
>     ConceptSchemes should provide completeness guarantees: if one label or note is structured, then all labels respectively notes are available as structured. I think these SPARQL tests should be used:
> 
>       o
> 
>         Some SKOSXL label exists:
> 
> <scheme> ^skos:inScheme/(skosxl:prefLabel|skosxl:altLabel|skosxl:hiddenLabel) ?label
> 
>   *
> 
>     Some skos:definition or skos:scopeNote is non-literal. I exclude: skos:changeNote, skos:historyNote, skos:editorialNote because these may be structured without the "business payload" notes being structured; skos:example because conceivably it can point to a resource; skos:note because that's a super-prop of excluded props (but many people use it directly, so I'm not sure):
> 
> <scheme> ^skos:inScheme/(skos:definition|skos:scopeNote) ?definition
> 
> 
> Assuming subsumption/redundancy (that "structured" includes "simple") and that the client can use SPARQL then "duplicate matching" can be done easily in SPARQL. Eg something like this:
> 
> select ?lab ?prop ?propLabel ?metadata {
> 
>    <concept> skos:prefLabel ?lab.
> 
>    optional {
> 
>      <concept> skosxl:prefLabel ?label.
> 
>      ?label skosxl:literalForm ?label; ?prop ?metadata
> 
>      filter (?prop != skosxl:literalForm)
> 
>      optional {?prop (rdfs:label|skos:prefLabel) ?propLabel} # need lang preferencing here!
> 
>    }
> 
> }
> 
> 
> select ?def ?prop ?propLabel ?metadata {
> 
>    <concept> skos:definition ?def.
> 
>    optional {
> 
>      <concept> skos:definition ?definition.
> 
>      ?definition rdf:value ?def; ?prop ?metadata
> 
>      filter (?prop != rdf:value)
> 
>      optional {?prop (rdfs:label|skos:prefLabel) ?propLabel} # need lang preferencing here!
> 
>    }
> 
> }
> 
> 
> Are there any takers to formalize SKOS profiles?
> -- 
> Vladimir Alexiev, PhD, PMP
> Chief Data Architect
> Sirma AI, trading as Ontotext: https://www.ontotext.com <https://www.ontotext.com/>, LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/company-beta/208070>,Twitter <https://twitter.com/ontotext>,Rate GraphDB <http://www.capterra.com/database-management-software/reviews/157533/Graph%20DB/Ontotext/new>
> Email: vladimir.alexiev@ontotext.com <mailto:vladimir.alexiev@ontotext.com>, skype:valexiev1
> Mobile: +359 888 568 132, SMS: 359888568132@sms.mtel.net <mailto:359888568132@sms.mtel.net>
> Calendar: https://www.google.com/calendar/embed?src=vladimir.alexiev@ontotext.com
> Publications and CV: https://github.com/VladimirAlexiev/my
Received on Wednesday, 1 April 2020 10:29:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 1 April 2020 10:29:30 UTC