Re: SKOS Primer/ISSUE 36

Hi Sean,

That's a fair point.
I propose to add the following paragraph at the end of section 2.5 of 
the Primer
[[
Finally, it is important to notice that the SKOS vocabulary only offers 
a limited support for containment of KOS information in a concept 
scheme. skos:inScheme and skos:hasTopConcept link concept schemes and 
concepts. Yet, there is no mechanism in SKOS to record that a specific 
statement concerning these concepts, e.g. a skos:broader assertion, 
pertains to a specific concept scheme, while it is usually acknowledged 
that a KOS consists of both its concepts and the links that define them. 
It is however possible to represent and access such containment 
information by making use of more general provenance mechanisms, like 
Named Graphs for RDF. For more detail, see the Annex E of the SKOS 
Reference [SKOS-REFERENCE].
]]
Does this answer your comment?

Best,

Antoine

>
>
> I'm just catching up on some of the SKOS materials and I see that 
> ISSUE 36 was closed last week. I'm ok with the resolution -- I think 
> there isn't really an ideal solution to this that would fully please 
> me :-) given the inexpressivity of RDF. However, I wonder if there 
> should be some reference to this in the Primer (I'm citing version of 
> 24/1/08).
>
> Section 2.5 Concept Schemes describes how skos:inScheme can be used to 
> link concepts to concept schemes, but   is silent on whether the 
> broader/narrower relationships are "in" the scheme. There is a comment:
>
> [[Finally, for providing an efficient access to broader/narrower 
> concept hierarchies, SKOS coins a skos:hasTopConcept property. ]]
>
> but this is not quite the same thing. I suggest there should be some 
> explicit text in here covering the resolution to ISSUE 36.
>
> Cheers,
>
>     Sean
>
> -- 
> Sean Bechhofer
> School of Computer Science
> University of Manchester
> sean.bechhofer@manchester.ac.uk
> http://www.cs.manchester.ac.uk/people/bechhofer
>
>
>
>
>

Received on Thursday, 31 January 2008 11:26:51 UTC