- From: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
- Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 13:50:25 +0100
- To: Guus Schreiber <schreiber@cs.vu.nl>
- CC: SWD WG <public-swd-wg@w3.org>
Hi, My own thinking about this hasn't been able to distill an argument in favor of Term-as-class that would clearly overcome its drawbacks [1]. So I'm ready to support this resolution, but this shall not discourage people who see stronger arguments ;-) Cheers, Antoine [1] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/SkosDesign/RelationshipsBetweenLabels/Comparison > > ISSUE-26 [1] > RelationshipsBetweenLabels > > Considering that: > - representing lexical labels as classes would lead to an undesirable > complication of SKOS in straightforward use cases for the application > of SKOS, > - representing relationships between labels is required in some use > cases, and therefore an escape mechanism should preferably be > available for such thesauri, > > I propose the WG opts for an amended version of the second solution > proposed in [2]: > > RESOLUTION > > The WG resolves to add the following classes and properties to the > SKOS specification [3]: > > - the class skos:LabelRelation > - the properties skos:labelRelationSubject and > skos:labelRelationObject with domain LabelRelation and range rdfs:literal > > In addition, the SKOS Guide should describe guidelines for SKOS users > to define their label relations as specializations of LabelRelation > and gives examples of its intended usage. The SKOS specification > refrains for now to predefine specializations of LabelRelation. > > Contrary to the proposal in [2] the class LabelRelation is not defined > as a subclass of skos:Annotation (which is in any case not yet part of > the spec), as it is not an "annotation", but a lexical relationship. > > > [1] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/26 > [2] > http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/SkosDesign/RelationshipsBetweenLabels > [3] http://www.w3.org/TR/swbp-skos-core-spec/ >
Received on Tuesday, 27 February 2007 12:50:36 UTC