On Sat, Oct 9, 2010 at 4:49 PM, John F. Sowa <sowa@bestweb.net> wrote: > On 10/9/2010 4:40 PM, Pavithra wrote: > > It is also possible to use |skos:altLabel| to represent cases of /upward > > posting/ [ISO-2788 > > <http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/NOTE-skos-primer-20090818/#ISO2788>]. That > > is, when a concept aggregates more-specialized notions that are not > > explicitly introduced as concepts in the considered KOS: > > > > ex:rocks rdf:type skos:Concept; > > skos:prefLabel "rocks"@en; > > skos:altLabel "basalt"@en; > > skos:altLabel "granite"@en; > > skos:altLabel "slate"@en > > Bigus Dealus Gloriosus. > > Is that supposed to be *simple* ? John is right to be sceptical- This is not what upward posting is supposed to be used for; in fact upward posting is itself considered to be extremely poor form in Knowledge Organization Systems. Even the SKOS primer notes this. The Alternative Labels for a SKOS Concept fulfill the role of USE/USE FOR relationships in traditional knowledge organization systems like thesauri. They are used to indicate different natural language strings that refer to the same set of ``documents''. This approach was used in the past if a document collection only had a few books on rocks, and using the most specific headings would send the patron scuttling between too many different file drawers. I do not believe that this is a good match for the desired use case. Simon
Received on Saturday, 9 October 2010 21:22:12 UTC