Re: ISSUE-146: Last Call Comment: broadMatch and skos:narrowMatch should be used only when there are no exact or close matches for the term elsewhere?

On 22 Oct 2008, at 20:04, Antoine Isaac wrote:

> +1 for the first part. Disjointness of properties seems for the  
> moment a bit difficult to state, given the meagre amount of  
> expertise in that domain. Actually for some experiments we have  
> thought about that, and came with no definitive conclusion.  It  
> depends on what you want to do with the mappings, it seems. Some  
> cases would accomodate very well non-disjoint properties, some will  
> actually exploit the disjointess to make inferences wrt. to the  
> quality of an alignment.
> For the second part, I do not really understand the comment. Where  
> have we stated that the semantic relationships are of secondary  
> importance? I mean, having a significant part of our vocabulary  
> (and our documents) about them acknowledges the relevance of these,  
> doesn't it? And with respect to the use of semantic relationships I  
> think the UCR documents provides enough evidence of how important  
> they are for the scope of SKOS...

I think that's more or less what Alistair is saying here isn't it?


Sean Bechhofer
School of Computer Science
University of Manchester

Received on Friday, 24 October 2008 09:53:22 UTC