ISSUE-149

Last Call Comment: Asymmetric associations

State:
POSTPONED
Product:
SKOS
Raised by:
Alistair Miles
Opened on:
2008-10-01
Description:
Raised by Erik Hennum in [1]:

"""
In our experience, while we've had no need for symmetric associations,
we've had considerable need for directional, non-hierarchical associations.
For instance, our target audience perceives a directional association
between a hardware platform and the operating systems that run on the
platform and again between an operating system and the software
applications that run on the operating system.

In Section 8.6.3. Symmetry of skos:related, the draft makes a point of
providing examples of asymmetric subproperties of skos:related, suggesting
that our experience may not be unusual.

Is this requirement sufficiently common that it makes sense to provide an
asymmetric subproperty of skos:related as part of the standard rather than
have many adopters solve the same problem in different ways?  Effectively,
this subproperty would be a broader / narrower relationships that does
_not_ entail or imply the weak transitive associations that construct the
hierarchy.
"""

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Jun/0103.html
Related emails:
  1. ISSUE-149: Last Call Comment: Asymmetric associations (from dean+cgi@w3.org on 2008-10-01)
  2. Re: SKOS comment (from alistair.miles@zoo.ox.ac.uk on 2008-10-01)
  3. Re: SKOS comment (from ehennum@us.ibm.com on 2008-10-02)
  4. Re: ISSUE-149: Last Call Comment: Asymmetric associations (from alistair.miles@zoo.ox.ac.uk on 2008-10-22)
  5. Re: ISSUE-149: Last Call Comment: Asymmetric associations (from aisaac@few.vu.nl on 2008-10-22)
  6. proposal to resolve remaining no change and editorial comments (from alistair.miles@zoo.ox.ac.uk on 2008-10-23)
  7. Re: proposal to resolve remaining no change and editorial comments (from sean.bechhofer@manchester.ac.uk on 2008-10-23)
  8. Re: ISSUE-149: Last Call Comment: Asymmetric associations (from sean.bechhofer@manchester.ac.uk on 2008-10-24)
  9. ISSUE-149: Last Call Comment: Asymmetric associations (from alistair.miles@zoo.ox.ac.uk on 2008-11-06)
  10. Fwd: ISSUE-151: Last Call Comment: skos:member definition (from sean.bechhofer@manchester.ac.uk on 2008-11-11)

Related notes:

2008-11-10: ACTION: Accept

2008-11-11: CHANGE-TYPE: None

2008-11-11: RESOLUTION: While we are sympathetic to these requirements, at the current time we propose to postpone development of a standard solution and leave it for future working groups or for third party extensions developed within the community of practice. Both the SKOS Reference (section 8.6.3) and the SKOS Primer (section 4.7) currently provide examples of how to develop third party extensions to SKOS semantic relations. Can you live with this?

2008-11-11: COMMENTER-RESPONSE: Accept