W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-swd-wg@w3.org > January 2008

Re: TR : [SKOS]: [ISSUE 44] BroaderNarrowerSemantics

From: Johannes Busse <busse@ontoprise.de>
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 15:16:21 +0100
Message-ID: <478CC035.1030308@ontoprise.de>
To: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
CC: SWD WG <public-swd-wg@w3.org>, SKOS <public-esw-thes@w3.org>

Hi Alan,

Ruttenberg wrote:
> isNarrowerThan  isBroaderThan is even clearer, IMO. The test for clarity 
> would be to use the predicate in a sentence and see if it makes sense. 
yes, but ...

> So compare
> "train" isBroaderThan "train station"
> vs
> "train station" hasBroader "train"
I opt for No 2.

Our company develops OWL and F-Logic Ontologies. To my understanding 
there is a common policy in RDF modeling:

[mammal broader animal]
is an abbreviation for (resp. disambiguates to)
[mammal has_broader animal].

If you want to say broader_of there is no abbrev.

Additionally in RDF we speak of [Subject Predicate Object].
In modelling [animal is_broader_of mammal] we would toggle
the S P O syntax with the help of a passive sentence
to an O P S reading, which looks somewhat odd to
me -- at least from the RDF perspective.

Dr. Johannes Busse, Senior Researcher
Amalienbadstraße 36 (Raumfabrik 29) D 76227 Karlsruhe
Reg. Office: Karlsruhe, Amtsger. Mannheim, HRB 109540
Managing Directors:    Prof.Dr.J.Angele,  H.P.Schnurr
http://www.ontoprise.de   | phone x49(721) 509 809-62
mailto:busse@ontoprise.de | mobile x49(163) 509 80-62
Received on Thursday, 17 January 2008 07:26:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:31:47 UTC