Re: ISSUE-186: Last Call Comment: Mappings


I was about to write a draft answer for the comment of Michael below. 
But I feel very uncomfortable doing it without further discussion.

Indeed for the moment my own position would be just to drop the 
sub-property links between skos:broadMatch and skos:broader, etc, which 
base Michael's objection. But that would mean changing our resolution on 
ISSUE-71 [2]

Further, I'd like to point at a comment on the SKOS mailing list by 
Bernard Vatant [1], who quite rightfully points that if we want to 
related mapping links to semantic ones, then we might also want to state 
that skos:mappingRelation is a subproperty of skos:semanticRelation. 
Which is not the case for the moment.

In the end, whatever be our answer wrt the sub-property link between 
mapping properties and paradigmatic relations, it seems that the 
resolution to ISSUE-71 has to be amended (enven though this amendment 
can be very small)



> ISSUE-186: Last Call Comment: Mappings
> Raised by: Sean Bechhofer
> On product: SKOS
> Raised by Michael Panzer [1]:
> 6. Mappings
> -----------
> The problem of restricting SKOS to one-to-one mappings has already been
> raised as ISSUE-131. We share the concerns expressed there.
> We also see potential problems in deriving the mapping relations
> skos:broadMatch and skos:narrowMatch from skos:broader and
> skos:narrower. In ISO standard and current practices many multilingual
> thesauri did not use broader or narrower to indicate the mapping
> relations. SKOS should revisit those standards and follow the current
> standards' development to make sure SKOS is consistent in representing
> the indicators used by standards (and the thesauri following those
> standards) for so many years.  
> In addition, when mapping systems that are structurally heterogeneous
> (e.g., classification systems and thesauri), the links established
> through mappings have no hierarchical implications at all.
> Currently, skos:broader is used both for the hierarchical relationship
> between classes as well as between concepts. Mapping relations that are
> subproperties of skos:broader/skos:narrower are not able to sufficiently
> support interoperability between structurally heterogeneous systems.
> In addition, many different indicators of degree of mapping have been
> used in integrated vocabularies, e.g., major mapping, minor mapping,
> alternative mapping, and overlapping.  These may make the mapping
> properties even more complicated. The solution here might again be to
> extend mapping properties.
> [1]

Received on Friday, 17 October 2008 08:37:13 UTC