Re: Lightweight RDF to Map Various Semantic Representations of Species

Hi Peter (ccing the SKOS list, as this is a SKOS implementation, after all :-)

I also think that's really a cool effort, with a great potential!

My question would be about your choices wrt. the use of relatedMatch and closeMatch: why do we have skos:relatedMatch 
and skos:closeMatch
All three seem to be about the same beast, namely the one at [1]. I'd be very much interested in hearing about your decision criterion!




> Hi LOD'ers :-)
> I am trying to work out some way to map the various semantic 
> representations for a species, in conjunction with a friendly three 
> letter organization.
> The goal of these documents is in part to improve "findability" of 
> information about species. 
> The hope is that they will also help serve as a bridge from the LOD 
> to species information from the three letter organization and it's partners.
> The resources are mapped using skos:closeMatch.
> This should allow consumers to choose those attributes of each species 
> resource that they think are appropriate.
> It has been suggested to me that more comprehensive documents describing 
> species should be in the form of OWL documents, so I have included 
> nonfunctional links to these hypothetical resources.
> I have the following examples, and am looking for comments and suggestions.
> RDF Example
> <>Ontology       
> <>Ontology Doc 
> VOID    
> <>I look forward to 
> your comments and suggestions, :-)
> - Pete
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> Pete DeVries
> Department of Entomology
> University of Wisconsin - Madison
> 445 Russell Laboratories
> 1630 Linden Drive
> Madison, WI 53706
> GeoSpecies Knowledge Base
> About the GeoSpecies Knowledge Base
> ------------------------------------------------------------

Received on Tuesday, 1 December 2009 16:10:01 UTC