Re: ISSUE-26: SimpleExtension proposal

Daniel Rubin a écrit :
> Guus,
> I have a few comments on this. See below:
> At 06:25 AM 5/29/2007, Guus Schreiber wrote:
>> ACTION: Guus revise his ISSUE-26 proposal to account for other 
>> options [recorded in 
>> All,
>> Below is my SimpleExtension proposal for isue 26 (relations between 
>> labels). I haven't had time to check the syntax of the examples or 
>> put it on the Wiki.
>> Guus
>> SKOS ISSUE-26 Relations between Labels: "SimpleExtension" Proposal
>> This is a proposal for resolution of SKOS ISSUE-33.
>> 0. Summary
>> The proposal extends SKOS with the possibility to define a term as a
>> resource, such that statements can be made about it. To this end we
>> introduce the class skos:Term plus the corresponding properties (pref,
>> alt, hidden) which link a concept to a term.
>> The property skos:relatedTerm can be used to express relations between
>> terms. Applications will typically specialize this to define
>> particular lexical relations.
>> The proposal ensures OWL DL compatibility.
>> 1. Vocabulary
>> The proposal introduces the following new vocabulary:
>>  skos:Term
> Can we get the English definition of a skos:Term?
> Also, in terms of naming "Term," this is find if SKOS restricts itself 
> to modeling thesauri, but for people who are creating ontologies to 
> represent things in reality, "entity" would be better than "term". In 
> my biomedical use cases, I have examples of this.
I think we might have a problem here. The idea is just to create links 
between labels associated to concepts, not between all the things that 
are in the world.
Could you give us one of your examples?

>>  skos:prefTerm
>>  skos:altTerm
>>  skos:hiddenTerm
>>  skos:relatedTerm
> Can we get English definitions of each of these?
They are just the equivalent of prefLabel, altLabel and hiddenLabel, but 
for Terms
>> 2. Axiomatic Triples
>> The following triples are added:
>>  skos:Term rdf:type rdfs:Class.
>>  skos:prefTerm rdf:type rdf:Property.
>>  skos:prefTerm rdfs:domain skos:Concept.
>>  skos:prefTerm rdfs:range skos:Term.
>>  skos:altTerm rdf:type rdf:Property.
>>  skos:altTerm rdfs:domain skos:Concept.
>>  skos:altTerm rdfs:range skos:Term.
>>  skos:hiddenTerm rdf:type rdf:Property.
>>  skos:hiddenTerm rdfs:domain skos:Concept.
>>  skos:hiddenTerm rdfs:range skos:Term.
>>  skos:relatedTerm rdf:type rdf:Property.
>>  skos:relatedTerm rdfs:domain skos:Term.
>>  skos:relatedTerm rdfs:range skos:Term.
> In terms of naming properties, it is often helpful to adopt a naming 
> convention such as a "has" prefix to distinguish names of properties 
> from classes. How about naming these hasPrefTerm, etc?
I would also like that kind of convention, as I said in
The problem is that there is a lot of sense naming these properties as 
the initial SKOS labeling properties (prefLabel etc.) are named.
>> 4. Consistent Examples
>> The example below shows two terms for a concept, where one term is 
>> defined
>> as the acronym of the other term.
>>  ex:who    rdf:type skos:Concept;
>>    skos:prefTerm ex:who1.
>>    skos:altTerm ex:wh02
>>  ex:who1    rdf:type skos:Term;
>>    rdfs:label "World Health Organization"@en-us;
>>    rdfs:label "Wereldgezondheidsorganisatie"@nl.
>>  ex:who2    rdf:type skos:Term;
>>    rdfs:label "WHO"@en.
>>  ex:acronymOf    rdf:type rdf:Property;
>>    rdf:subPropertyOf skos:relatedTerm.
>>  ex:who2 ex:acronymOf who1.
> In this example, did you mean to say "ex:who  rdf:type  skos:Term"?
No, it is a concept, which is associated to two terms, who1 and who2



Received on Tuesday, 29 May 2007 17:13:50 UTC