Re: SemWeb terminology page

Quoting Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>:


>
> I also hear "code list" from Geo people lately (as well as moves to
> encode these in SKOS btw).
>
>

Yes, although code lists provide another catch that I don't think  
we've yet got a solution for. Code lists are literally lists of codes,  
e.g. "en" "fr" "sp" for the languages. The code isn't really the  
prefLabel, at least not the user preLabel. The codes exist because  
they are to be input in fixed-length fields (remember when saving one  
byte in every record was important?). The user display is generally  
the spelled out form of the term, and could be available in different  
languages.

I don't know of a way in SKOS to say: this is the standard code for  
this term. It's not an altLabel, it's really a different kind of beast.

kc


>> The analogy to properties is "data elements" in the traditional IT world. In
>> fact, the MARC documentation refers to the fields and subfields as data
>> elements. For that reason, "metadata element" and "metadata element set"
>> seem to resonate with folks who are already somewhat familiar with a data
>> processing model. However, I worry that people will assume that a property
>> is the same as a data element.
>>
>> The terms "property," "value" and "statement" have no meaning for folks in
>> the library world. These are new concepts, and should be introduced as
>> representing a new way of creating and using metadata. I think it is
>> legitimate to say that MARC does not have properties (in the semweb sense),
>> and there are no statements in a MARC record as it is coded today. The
>> advantage here is that librarians can move to new concepts and a new
>> vocabulary about those concepts, which I think will help keep them from
>> dragging the old ideas along with them into the semantic web.
>>
>> Therefore (after all of that), I would vote for using 'value vocabularies'
>> and 'properties' ('set of properties' for something like foaf or dcterms?),
>> but explain them in terms of controlled lists and data elements, emphasizing
>> the differences.
>
> Just a nitpic: most/many RDF vocabularies (DC, SKOS, FOAF at least)
> describe classes of thing as well as property terms; Agent, Image,
> Document etc. The fancier ones (in OWL often) also define some other
> bits and pieces too, eg. instances of a class (to use as a controlled
> value...), or to express rules. So 'set of properties' captures 2/3 of
> what FOAF or DC or SKOS define. 'Set of property and class terms'
> captures pretty much everything, unless a vocabulary is making heavy
> use of OWL.
>
>> Yep, easier said than done.
>
> Can't argue there :)
>
> Dan
>



-- 
Karen Coyle
kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
ph: 1-510-540-7596
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet

Received on Wednesday, 3 November 2010 16:45:13 UTC