SKOS and OWL - set based constructs

The idea is that the skos-mapping constructs are a more convenient and
intuitive shorthand for more formal set based constructs that could be
expressed in OWL. 

So for example, you may consider that statements such as ...

<soks:Concept rdf:about="#A">
			<rdf:li rdf:resource="#B"/>
			<rdf:li rdf:resource="#C"/>

... are in fact a convenient shorthand for the statements ...

   <owl:onProperty rdf:resource="&dc;subject"/> 
   <owl:hasValue rdf:resource="#A"/> 
   <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:parseType="resource"> 
      <owl:intersectionOf rdf:parseType="collection"> 
            <owl:onProperty rdf:resource="&dc;subject"/> 
            <owl:hasValue rdf:resource="#B"/> 
            <owl:onProperty rdf:resource="&dc;subject"/> 
            <owl:hasValue rdf:resource="#C"/> 

For further discussion of this problem, see the extended writeup of open
design issues on the SWAD RDF Thesaurus wiki (Issue 9 - Inter-thesaurus
mapping) <>.

What do you think of this?



> -----Original Message-----
> From: []
> Sent: 26 November 2003 18:59
> To:
> Subject: Re: SKOS-Mapping comments and labels added
> You wrote:
> >Comments and labels have been added to the SKOS-Mapping vocabulary.
> >
> ><>
> This file contains AND, OR, and NOT properties which mimic OWL
> vocabulary elements: owl:intersectionOf, owl:unionOf, and 
> owl:complementOf respectively.  Why invent new terms?
> -Evan
> Evan K. Wallace
> Manufacturing Systems Integration Division

Received on Thursday, 27 November 2003 08:54:20 UTC