[SKOS] primer on relationship between Concept Schemes and OWL Ontologies

Apologies for not getting to this sooner.


== Sub-Section 3.1 ==

If an application concerned with provenance information (see Section 4.5)
reads this statement, it will infer that the triples present in the original
concept scheme are also "stated" by the newly defined concept scheme.

I think it would be more appropriate to say something like: "If an
application reads this statement, it may request a representation of the
original concept scheme (via its URI), process the response (if any) into an
RDF graph, and include that graph within the representation of the extended
concept scheme." ... or something like that. This feels like splitting
hairs, but I don't think an OWL imports statement licenses any formal
"inferences" as such. The OWL Reference and OWL Semantics both have some
fairly careful language about what owl:imports means.

Apart from that, no comments other than those stated in my original review

== Sub-Section 3.3 ==

I have no comments on the content. My only thought is, this sub-section
could be moved to section 4.

ACTION: Alistair and Guus to check the text in the primer on relationship
between Concept Schemes and OWL Ontologies. [recorded in


[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Feb/0093.html
Alistair Miles
Senior Computing Officer
Image Bioinformatics Research Group
Department of Zoology
The Tinbergen Building
University of Oxford
South Parks Road
United Kingdom
Web: http://purl.org/net/aliman
Email: alistair.miles@zoo.ox.ac.uk
Tel: +44 (0)1865 281993

Received on Monday, 14 April 2008 08:51:18 UTC