Re: ISSUE-147: Last Call Comment: Notations as plain literals

Hi all,

Here's a draft response to Erik on [ISSUE-147], let me know what you  
think. Note *this is just a draft, not the actual response* -- I'll  
wait for feedback from the WG before replying formally to Erik.  
(Erik: if you're lurking on this list feel free to post your thoughts  
at any time.)


Dear Erik,

thanks for your comments [1,ISSUE-147]:

While it should certainly be possible to specify a datatype for a  
relying on the datatype to identify the classification scheme and thus
effectively requiring the datatype seems complex and a barrier to  

Would it be possible to use a distinct skos:ConceptScheme instead of a
datatype to identify each notational classification scheme?  enumerating
the notations with skos:Concepts?  Mapping properties could then  
the concepts from the notational classification scheme with concepts  
in the
scheme that's the focus of interest.  The datatype could then be  
and used for validation of value format (as is commonly expected for XML
Schema datatypes).

The cost would be some indirection, but that could be mitigated by  
URI identifiers for notational concepts in which the final step is a
recognizable variant on the notation for the concept.  The benefit  
would be
consistency, simplicity, and a public, reusable SKOS definition of each
notational classification scheme.


The design pattern that you propose is consistent with the SKOS data  
and could be used to address the issue of notations.

We welcome discussion of such patterns within the SKOS community, but  
at this
point propose to make no changes to the current document.

Are you able to live with this?.


	Sean Bechhofer
	Alistair Miles


Sean Bechhofer
School of Computer Science
University of Manchester

Received on Monday, 10 November 2008 17:38:07 UTC