- From: Bernard Horan <Bernard.Horan@sun.com>
- Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2006 10:42:46 +0000
- To: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
- Cc: SWD WG <public-swd-wg@w3.org>
Antoine Antoine Isaac wrote on 29/11/06 10:05: > Hello Barnard, > >>>> >>>> 2) you need to stress the optionality of providing a vocabulary--I >>>> could imagine several companies that would be unwilling to put their >>>> vocabularies into the public domain. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Do you think the current version does not put that clearly enough? >>> When we ask for data, we emphasize rather on samples rather than >>> complete things... >> >> >> >> I think it might acknowledge that respondents might not be willing to >> share the detail of the vocabulary. >> >> Also, as a wider question, do you think a sample/fragment of a >> vocabulary would really be that useful? > > > Yes, provided it is complete enough in terms of vocabulary features > (that is, the things we want the users to describe in the following > subsection) > > For example I can present you with this thing: > > 075607204 geneeskunde > RT geneesmiddelen > NT kindergeneeskunde > 075607220 geneesmiddelen > UF medicijnen > 075611791 kindergeneeskunde > BT geneeskunde > NT kinderoncologie > NT neonatologie > noot: kinderen ouder dan 12 vallen niet onder > kindergeneeskunde > medicijnen > USE geneesmiddelen > > It's quite simple, I feel I don't betray my institute by making that > public (the vocabulary is more than 5000 terms wide) and illustrates > more than half of the features encountered in this vocabulary. OK, I can see that a combination of your snippet with the description of its schema may be sufficient. regards Bernard
Received on Thursday, 30 November 2006 10:43:10 UTC