[SKOS] Closing ISSUE-74 MappingPropertyConventions

Dear all,

Trying to decompose issues, as Sean requested.
I will actually not try to decompose the discussion in [1] because it is 
a whole about ISSUE-71 and ISSUE-74.

Shortly, [1] tries to show that mapping relationships and standard 
(paradigmatic) relationships are different. They result from different 
activities, and are situated on a different level with respect to 
authority and concept scheme design. Furthermore, these differences can 
be de-coupled from the question whether the concepts linked by a mapping 
relationship (resp. a paradigmatic one) are member of a same concept 
scheme or of different ones. For instance, one can conceive mapping 
scenarios that apply within a scheme (KOS enrichment), and paradigmatic 
liaison scenarios that apply between concept schemes (KOS extension).

Assuming this understanding is correct, and that the WG has adopted for 
ISSUE-74 the resolution in [2], I propose the following resolution for 
ISSUE-74:

RESOLUTION: Even though it is acknowledged that SKOS (paradigmantic) 
semantic relation properties will, in most applications, link conceptual 
resources that stand within a same scheme, nothing in the SKOS model 
prevents their use for concepts from different schemes. Similarly, even 
though it is acknowledged that SKOS mapping relation properties will, in 
most applications, link conceptual resources coming from different 
concept schemes, nothing in the SKOS model prevents their use for 
concepts that stand within a same scheme.

Antoine

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Feb/0062.html
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Feb/0076.html

Received on Tuesday, 19 February 2008 18:43:35 UTC