- From: Young,Jeff (OR) <jyoung@oclc.org>
- Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2011 11:41:07 -0500
- To: "Mark van Assem" <mark@cs.vu.nl>, <public-xg-lld@w3.org>
- Cc: "Karen Coyle" <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
Although SKOS isn't mentioned, Mark's wording implies that a skos:ConceptScheme would qualify as a "Value Vocabulary". VIAF derives its ontology from SKOS, so that seems to confirm the sense people had today that VIAF falls into this category. OTOH, foaf:focus provides a connection between SKOS and reality (FOAF/RDA/etc.) that VIAF also uses: http://xmlns.com/foaf/spec/#term_focus I would argue that information on this side of foaf:focus falls into the "Dataset" category. This could explain the tension Karen noted of how to classify VIAF. I'm inclined to believe this foaf:focus pattern is the key to "authority data" in general and I'm trying to weave it into the use case cluster document. Are people willing to believe foaf:focus provides the same type of symmetry between "value vocabulary" and "dataset" as it does between "concept" and "reality"? Jeff > -----Original Message----- > From: public-xg-lld-request@w3.org [mailto:public-xg-lld- > request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Mark van Assem > Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2011 8:00 AM > To: public-xg-lld@w3.org > Cc: Karen Coyle > Subject: Re: vocabs, metadata set, datasets > > > Hi all, > > As per my action I have written some text [1] to explain the terms > "dataset, metadata element set, value vocabulary" with feedback from > Karen and Antoine to address the things that don't fit very nicely. > > Please let me know what you think, after I've had your input we'll put > it on the public list to get shot at. > > Mark. > > [1]http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/wiki/Library_terminology_informally_explai > ned#Vocabularies.2C_Element_sets.2C_Datasets > > On 28/12/2010 18:40, Karen Coyle wrote: > > I have been organizing the vocabularies and technologies on the > archives > > cluster page [1] and it was a very interesting exercise trying to > > determine what category some of the "things" fit into. This could > turn > > out to be a starting place for our upcoming discussion of our > > definitions since it has real examples. The hard part seems to be > value > > vocabularies v. datasets, and I have a feeling that there will not be > a > > clear line between them. > > > > kc > > [1] > > > http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/Cluster_Archives#Vocabularies > _and_Technologies > > > > >
Received on Thursday, 6 January 2011 16:47:17 UTC