- From: Alistair Miles <alistair.miles@zoo.ox.ac.uk>
- Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2008 17:01:31 +0100
- To: "'SWD WG'" <public-swd-wg@w3.org>
Hi all, Sean & I had a phone call this morning, to discuss progress on the SKOS Reference. Here's a quick summary of our discussion. == Label Relations == Al's been thinking about Antoine's comments on label relations and the SKOS-XL sketch. There are three alternative patterns for representing label relations, being (1) n-ary relations between plain literals (currently in the SKOS Reference); (2) n-ary relations between some other class of resources (e.g. xl:Label); and (3) direct (binary) relations between some other class of resources. We don't seem to be in a position to recommend any one in favour of the others. So maybe we should move support for all three patterns outside the SKOS Reference to an extension? Al will try to write a message on this. == SKOS & Imports == Sean had a chat with Simon Jupp recently, regarding implementation of SKOS within an OWL environment. Simon noted that the use of owl:imports between SKOS concept schemes pushes you into OWL Full. We're not sure what to do here, given that OWL imports is the only existing mechanism for importing RDF graphs, and given the likely resistance against "rolling our own" imports mechanism. Sean will try to send a message to the list on this topic. == Formal Schema == Sean has a first draft of a formal schema for SKOS, written in Turtle. We had a quick discussion, and agreed first priority is to ensure the axioms agree with the prose definitions in the SKOS Reference. Al noted that use of SKOS documentation properties will make the schema OWL Full, maybe possible to have a SKOS formal schema as an OWL DL ontology? Regarding the namespace, Sean has for now assumed we'll be using a new namespace. We had a quick discussion about the namespace issue, Al has no strong favourite from the two options, Sean (mildly?) favours a new namespace. == Mapping Relations == Al plans to have a look at the question of mapping relations. We briefly discussed the four scenarios, and when to use semantic relations versus mapping relations, the scenarios being (1) describing internal structure of a concept scheme; (2) mapping between different concept schemes; (3) linking two or more concept schemes to make one "big" concept scheme; (4) adding structure to someone else's concept scheme. Al will try to write a message on this. Regards, Alistair. -- Alistair Miles Senior Computing Officer Image Bioinformatics Research Group Department of Zoology The Tinbergen Building University of Oxford South Parks Road Oxford OX1 3PS 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 16:02:09 UTC