- From: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
- Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2013 17:06:02 -0700
- To: Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>
- CC: W3C Web Schemas Task Force <public-vocabs@w3.org>
On 10/20/13 3:33 PM, Dan Brickley wrote: \ > The way RDF and schema.org works, means that anything that is 'the > name of the item' is a legit value for this property. Are there any > values for a SKOS-like prefLabel that would not also count as 'a name > of' the item/concept? To the extent concepts have names at all, I'd > guess their preferred labels would all be names. Not that I can think of. > > If not, i.e. if every preferred label of a concept is also a name, and > if we still want to maintain an explicit notion of 'preferred label', > then this seems a good candidate for describing as a sub-property / > super-property relationship. *IF* there is a use case for prefLabel in the SKOS sense, then I can imagine it as a sub-property of name, with the additional constraint of being unique within the concept scheme, as per the SKOS rules. But that brings up the question of what "unique within the concept scheme" means in schema.org. If some resource has a prefLabel, can there be only one such string value as a prefLabel in all of schema.org? If people want to create value lists, and they want to provide prefLabels, altLabels and hiddenLabels for things in those lists, to do so within schema.org is problematic because with only one namespace available you essentially are limited to one single concept scheme. This is not practical. It is hard enough to create a schema with single namespace for properties; for value lists it will be even more difficult. This argues for retaining schema:name, without the constraint of uniqueness within the namespace, and allowing altLabel and hiddenLabel to be used with schema, since they are relatively unconstrained. That said, if the use case is to create application or community-specific value lists, then I don't see why one would not develop a thesaurus or controlled list under an appropriate namespace using SKOS. kc We've used that notion already in the > Action design, to relate focussed action-type-specific properties to > the broader, vaguer properties on http://schema.org/Action. It might > help here too (even though schema.org term navigation doesn't offer > any support for sub-property links yet). > > Dan > -- Karen Coyle kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net m: 1-510-435-8234 skype: kcoylenet
Received on Monday, 21 October 2013 00:06:31 UTC