Re: SKOS for schema.org proposal for discussion

Hi Karen:
On Oct 9, 2013, at 6:05 PM, Karen Coyle wrote:

> I agree with Ed on the naming (and on much else that he has said). I don't think it will be easy to explain when to define a schema/Enumeration and when to use schema/enumConcept. Obviously, there is no bright line, but for each list a metadata developer will need to make the choice.
> 
> The use of "enum" is likely to cause more confusion between these two use cases. Much care will need to be taken in defining enumConcept, and there may need to be additional documentation (beyond the short definition) to make this clear.
> 
> I actually think that both "enum" and "Concept" are problematic. What is the essence of this property? Is it that its values are members of an external list? Or ...? Whatever it is, it seems that the name should evoke something that resonates to that meaning.
> 

I agree with Guha that we should not spend too much further time on discussion the actual name of the element - EnumConcept is fine I guess, mostly because it is so cryptic that Joe the Web Developer and Jane the Semantic Web Researcher will not use it without looking it up ;-)

As for the definition - why no heavily draw upon

http://www.w3.org/TR/skos-reference/#concepts

"3. The skos:Concept Class

3.1. Preamble

The class skos:Concept is the class of SKOS concepts.

A SKOS concept can be viewed as an idea or notion; a unit of thought. However, what constitutes a unit of thought is subjective, and this definition is meant to be suggestive, rather than restrictive.

The notion of a SKOS concept is useful when describing the conceptual or intellectual structure of a knowledge organization system, and when referring to specific ideas or meanings established within a KOS.

Note that, because SKOS is designed to be a vehicle for representing semi-formal KOS, such as thesauri and classification schemes, a certain amount of flexibility has been built in to the formal definition of this class.

See the [SKOS-PRIMER] for more examples of identifying and describing SKOS concepts."

I think we are in agreement that the conceptual element actually *is* equivalent to skos:Concept. The debate was mostly about the name in the context of schema.

Martin





> kc
> 
> On 10/9/13 8:44 AM, Ed Summers wrote:
>> Ok, that's a good reason. But does EnumConcept sound like something
>> that's easy to use? Also, does something as abstract as a concept
>> sound easy to use in the context of everything else that is in
>> schema.org?
>> 
>> For me the answer is no...at least with what I know now about the proposal.
>> 
>> //Ed
>> 
>> On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 11:33 AM, Jarno van Driel <jarno@quantumspork.nl> wrote:
>>>> But why would that person want to use schema.org to
>>> mark up their Concept/Term thing instead of SKOS.
>>> 
>>> My response to that would be: Ease of use!
>>> 
>>> The vast majority of people in the world have no idea semantic mark up
>>> exists. Let alone that they know how to use it. That's something we'd all
>>> like to change. To make that possible it simply much easier to have 1 source
>>> and 1 vocabulary for people to learn and to implement.
>>> 
>>> Working with semantics is now mostly a job for people who are already
>>> involved in this and have a basic understanding. 99.9% of the other people
>>> in the world don't and I think it's up to us to create a mechanism so they
>>> can easily start implementing semantics as well.
>>> The use of different vocabularies simply isn't really doable for a novice.
>>> Heck it's already hard for people who are involved.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 5:25 PM, Ed Summers <ehs@pobox.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 11:21 AM, Jason Douglas <jasondouglas@google.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Doesn't *somebody" have to define it inline?  Otherwise, how does it
>>>>> exist
>>>>> for other people to refer to by URL?  :)
>>>> 
>>>> Yes, of course :-) But why would that person want to use schema.org to
>>>> mark up their Concept/Term thing instead of SKOS.
>>>> 
>>>> //Ed
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> -- 
> Karen Coyle
> kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
> m: 1-510-435-8234
> skype: kcoylenet
> 

--------------------------------------------------------
martin hepp
e-business & web science research group
universitaet der bundeswehr muenchen

e-mail:  hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org
phone:   +49-(0)89-6004-4217
fax:     +49-(0)89-6004-4620
www:     http://www.unibw.de/ebusiness/ (group)
         http://www.heppnetz.de/ (personal)
skype:   mfhepp 
twitter: mfhepp

Check out GoodRelations for E-Commerce on the Web of Linked Data!
=================================================================
* Project Main Page: http://purl.org/goodrelations/

Received on Wednesday, 9 October 2013 16:13:52 UTC