- From: Alistair Miles <a.j.miles@rl.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2006 16:20:08 +0000
- To: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
- CC: public-esw-thes@w3.org, public-swbp-wg@w3.org
Hi Dan, On second thoughts I agree, let's not remove english annotations from the main RDF description. A link to the english annotations only is already in place: http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core_en Cheers, Al. Dan Brickley wrote: > * Alistair Miles <a.j.miles@rl.ac.uk> [2006-02-03 14:45+0000] >> Hi all, >> >> Following one of Jeremy's suggestions at [1], I'd like to propose we >> factor all English annotations out of the main RDF description of the >> SKOS Core Vocabulary and into a separate resource, as is currently the >> case for all annotations in other languages. Jeremy's reasons: >> >> - yes english is the default language in W3C > > <flamebait> And the world... </flamebait> > > (Especially the technology world) > >> - but also yes the english labels should be accessible using the >> same mechanisms as any other supported language. This will allow tools >> to not have to special case for english. > > I 100% agree that the English labels should be accessible by a > mechanism identical to the other language. But for the time being, > I suggest it would be counter productive to hide the English text > from tools. I don't know of any RDF or OWL tools that will go chasing > around rdfs:seeAlso links (sadly) when reading a vocabulary description. > I wish they did, ... but they way to achieve that imho is by patches > to opensource tools like Protege, rather than by removing triples and > hoping that folks notice and write the code to go find where the > triples are now hiding. > >> This change would mean removing all statements matching the triple patterns: >> >> - (?x rdfs:label ?y) >> - (?x rdfs:comment ?y) >> - (?x skos:definition ?y) >> >> ... from the main RDF description of the SKOS Core Vocabulary, and into >> a resource named: >> >> http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core_en > > +1 on adding the triples to core_en > > -1 on removing them from the main description > >> This change would also mean adding the following triple to the main RDF >> description of the SKOS Core Vocabulary: >> >> { >> <http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core> rdfs:seeAlso >> <http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core_en>. >> } > > +1 on the rdfs:seeAlso > >> Any objections to raising this proposal? > > Yup sorry. If this new idiom / deployment style is going to get > traction, it would need to be adopted by a few major vocabs. I don't > think going it alone 1st with SKOS is of any great value, and will only > cause annoyance amongst puzzled users. > > Here's another argument: the English version of the SKOS definitions > really *is* privileged, because it is the primary version agreed on by the > community, and the others are (perhaps lossily, fallibly) derrive from > it. Ideally this could be represented explicitly in RDF, and the > English language text be managed as you suggest. But for now, nobody > works that way. > > A vocab created and documented primarily in Japanese might make a > similar choice, but privilege the Japanese translations. I don't mean to > suggest that the 'default' text should always be English, and I'm > always delighted to find schemas documented in other languages... > > Dan > >> Cheers, >> >> Al. >> >> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Nov/0082.html >> -- >> Alistair Miles >> Research Associate >> CCLRC - Rutherford Appleton Laboratory >> Building R1 Room 1.60 >> Fermi Avenue >> Chilton >> Didcot >> Oxfordshire OX11 0QX >> United Kingdom >> Email: a.j.miles@rl.ac.uk >> Tel: +44 (0)1235 445440 > -- Alistair Miles Research Associate CCLRC - Rutherford Appleton Laboratory Building R1 Room 1.60 Fermi Avenue Chilton Didcot Oxfordshire OX11 0QX United Kingdom Email: a.j.miles@rl.ac.uk Tel: +44 (0)1235 445440
Received on Wednesday, 8 February 2006 16:20:58 UTC