Re: ISSUE-160: Allowing collections in semantic relationships/best practice role of SKOS

Dear all,

This may seem to be a bit of distraction from the present discussion but I would 
like to stress how important role standards like SKOS that are applied 
irrespective domains/sectors may play not only in its intended function but also 
in making people understand semantic relationships in knowledge organization 
systems.

If standards representing vocabularies would be brought closer by their general 
structure, data naming etc. this would facilitate learning and understanding of 
vocabularies by people who do not have time or incentive to read books to learn 
about semantic factoring, pre-coordination, phase relationships, facets etc. We 
would much quicker achieve a critical mass of people necessary to make further 
steps apply and cross over from one standard to another, one vocabulary to another.

Standards and data models are sometimes the best way of understanding data and 
their potential use. From that point of view 'instructive/best practice' 
dimension should ideally be incorporated in the standards.
For what is worth, and in contrast to Antoine's view, I would rather that SKOS 
is created mirroring the knowledge of those who know how to use KOS rather than 
refelecting the lefel of KOS understanding KOS of an average tabula rasa 
implementor. One cannot avoid to learn once starting to implement a KOS - well, 
then it may as well learn it properly.

Aida

Received on Tuesday, 16 December 2008 19:32:58 UTC