Re: [SKOS] on ISSUE-71 and ISSUE-74

A this week's telecon I promised to make a proposal about the semantic relation between skos:broader and skos:broaderMatch (and mutatis mutandis for skos:narrower and skos:related).  This should be seen as a possible addendum to Antoine's proposed resolutions [2, 3]. 

My suggestion is that the following semantic relationship holds:

  skos:broaderMatch rdfs:subPropertyOf skos:broader .

The usage pattern would be the following:

- an schema owner who wants to make a distinction between broader and broaderMatch relations should use the subproperty typing
- for such schema's  it would be reasonable to assume that instances of skos:broader that are not instances of skos:broaderMatch, are intra-scheme relations. 

A few remarks: 

- Through the inScheme property of concepts you can in principle derive whether a skos:broader relation is inter-scheme or intra-scheme. In this sense skos:broaderMatch is just a shorthand c.q. syntactic sugar. This is actually the main argument against having the Match relations at all. 

Turning this around, we could also say that if a broaderMatch relation exists between two concepts, then they must be in different schemes (useful if the inScheme property is not defined by the schema owner). 

- One could also say that we it would be neater to have two subproperties of skos:broader, for both intra-scheme and inter-scheme relations. In my opinion this creates too much new vocabulary and is an unwanted complexity.

- Another argument against this proposal is that some desired logical meta-properties (e.g. symmetry of skos:related) do *not* automatically inherit over the subproperty relation. 



VU University Amsterdam, Computer Science
De Boelelaan 1081a, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands
T: +31 20 598 7739/7718; F: +31 84 712 1446 
Home page:

Received on Wednesday, 27 February 2008 10:52:24 UTC