- From: Frederick Giasson <fred@fgiasson.com>
- Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 08:51:59 -0500
- To: sioc-dev@googlegroups.com
- Cc: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>, Golda Velez <gv@btucson.com>, Linking Open Data <linking-open-data@simile.mit.edu>, sioc-dev@groups.google.com, semantic-web@w3.org
Hi Alex, > (NB: Actually, since the Tag extends the Tag Ontology, Tag is a > subclass of skos:Concept) > > Ok but in that case, how a concept will be related to other concepts? By this I mean: each tag will be a concept without any relationship with other concepts. So, the graph of tags from this ontology will create a graph with unlinked nodes, thousands of them? It is sure that they can be put into relation, but given the fact that people tag anything for anything, I doubt they really will. > > Indeed, skos:Concept as a range wouldn't be ok, because I want people > to be able to use any URI as a meaning for their tag (i.e. what's in > their mind when using that tag in a given post context; eg I use the > tag "paris" -> in my mind this is "paris, france" -> I use the > specific URI from geonames), and not only a skos:Concept, but anything > from dbpedia, geonames (in this particular case this is a > skos:Concept), or existing knowledge base (eg: internal company > knowledge base with specific domain ontologies). > That's why the range is rdf:Resource, Fred. > Yeah it is what I thought was the reason. Meanly to be able to use DBPedia. However, if you would have your hands on a well defined skos meaning structure, would you consider using skos:Concept has range? So my question is: what drive this decision: the fact that DBPedia gives a good demo and is available, or really because it is what is optimal for the ontology? >> But I still believe that meaningURI could be changed to moat:concept, or >> something similar. >> > I have to think at the name maybe, but I think moat:concept will make > people think the range is a skos:Concept. > Any idea ? > > Working on the name is essential I think (personally do not like meaningURI :) ) moat:mean Meaning -- mean --> something > I'll make some schemas this afternoon, I'll hope it will be more clear. > (I started a moat-dev googlegroup for this kind of discussions) > > Good. Take care, Fred
Received on Monday, 21 January 2008 13:59:09 UTC