- From: Simon Spero <ses@unc.edu>
- Date: Sat, 2 Aug 2008 14:33:13 -0400
- To: "Antoine Isaac" <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
- Cc: public-esw-thes@w3.org, public-swd-wg@w3.org
Received on Saturday, 2 August 2008 18:33:49 UTC
On Sat, Aug 2, 2008 at 9:51 AM, Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl> wrote:
That's why we de-coupled what is not controversial ("this broader was
> asserted in that thesaurus, and we publisher of the thesaurus want you to
> know it") from what is useful but should not mess up with initial assertions
> (broaderTransitive)
Lets try and clarify things
In the scenario described above, publisher P asserts:
*A* broader *B*
What relationship is being asserted between the extensions of *A* and *B* (*
A* and *B*) ?
1) *A *⊂* B* ? (All A's are B's )
2) |*A* ∩* B*| > |*A* \ *B*| ? (more A's are B's than are not B's)
3) ∃a.(a ∈ *A* ∧ a ∈ *B*) ∧ ∃b.(b ∈ *B* ∧ b ∉ *A*) ? ( At least one A is
a B and at least one B is not an A)
Received on Saturday, 2 August 2008 18:33:49 UTC