- From: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
- Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2007 13:47:12 +0200
- To: Thomas Baker <baker@sub.uni-goettingen.de>
- CC: Daniel Rubin <rubin@med.stanford.edu>, SWD WG <public-swd-wg@w3.org>
Hi Tom, > On Fri, Jun 08, 2007 at 10:36:23AM +0200, Antoine Isaac wrote: > >> To add to this mutual clarification process: as said, nothing like a >> "term" appears now in current SKOS, it only popped up in the discussion >> because of loosely wording used in the proposals for solving the >> RelationshipBetweenLabels issue. [and of course I share a great deal of >> responsability for that :-(] Hence my will to replace"term"by >> "Lexicalization" (or by anything more neutral than "term") in Guus' >> proposal >> (http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/SkosDesign/RelationshipsBetweenLabels/ProposalThree) >> > > One problem is that "lexicalization" is not defined in > the average desk dictionary. How about http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/lexicalization ? Is it too unclear, or too process-oriented? > If I were to guess at it's > meaning, out of this context, I'd have said "the process of > lexicalizing", and I see that some linguists use lexicalization > to refer to the process of making a word for a concept, > but these meanings are misleading for what we want to say here. > > Given a choice between "lexicalization" and "term", I'd > still go for "term" but agree we should try to find something > more neutral. > Clearly "term" should be avoided. "LexicalToken"? "LabelResource"? I am ready to accept anything ;-) Antoine
Received on Friday, 8 June 2007 11:47:18 UTC