Re: New Draft comments: Motivations in SKOS

Hi Antoine, and all,

Could you verify that the below RDF is what is intended by your suggestions?

-------------------------
  oa:MotivationScheme a skos:ConceptScheme ;
    skos:hasTopConcept oa:annotating.

  oa:Motivation rdfs:subClassOf skos:Concept .

  oa:annotating a oa:Motivation ;
    skos:prefLabel "Annotating"@en .

  oa:editing a oa:Motivation ;
    skos:inScheme oa:MotivationScheme ;
    skos:broadMatch oa:annotating ;
    skos:prefLabel "Editing"@en .

  new:correcting a oa:Motivation ;
    skos:inScheme new:AScheme ;
    skos:broadMatch oa:editing ;
    skos:prefLabel "Correcting a Mistake"@en .

  new2:fixing a oa:Motivation ;
    skos:inScheme new2:AnotherSchemne ;
    skos:broadMatch oa:editing ;
    skos:closeMatch new:correcting ;
    skos:prefLabel "Fixing a Mistake"@en .
---------------------

And to your comments...

On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 8:59 AM, Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl> wrote:

> 1. Is oa:Annotating really needed? It should be enough that motivations
> are in oa:MotivationScheme (or are defined to be a sub-concept of a concept
> that is in oa:MotivationScheme) to infer that these are kind of annotation
> purposes.
>

The thought was that it would be easier to assert that the range of
oa:motivatedBy is a oa:Motivation, rather than any skos:Concept.  Also, as
below, they may not be in any Concept Scheme.  Unless there's a reason not
to, I think this would be good to keep.



> 2. Using skos:topConceptOf is valid, but this property was coined for
> technical reasons. It would be better to keep to the property in the other
> direction, skos:hasTopConcept.
>

Fixed in to-be-published revised draft.


3. I am not sure that putting all new motivation concepts (new:Correcting
> and new2:Fixing) in the reference oa:MotivationScheme. If several
> applications create their own, potentially overlapping motivation concepts,
> then oa:MotivationSheme risks becoming difficult to use. For extensions,
> knowing that a concept defined to be a sub-concept of a "reference" concept
> that is in oa:MotivationScheme (possibly indirectly, via
> skos:broaderTransitive) should meet most requirements I can think of


Agreed, fixed this.



> 4. It is good practice to use language tags with SKOS labels. This should
> appear in the machine-readable file, but also be reflected in the example.
>

Fixed.



> With all these suggestions, Figure B could be reworked to look more like
> the attached diagram (not trying to enforce any graphic convention here!
> It's just that I don't have time to refine it...)
>

This, too, will be fixed and published very shortly :)

Rob