- From: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
- Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2007 16:28:26 +0100
- To: "Miles, AJ \(Alistair\)" <A.J.Miles@rl.ac.uk>
- CC: public-swd-wg@w3.org, Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>
Hi Alistair, OK for the example. Actually I thought you should have seeLabelRelation in SKOS-XL because labelRelated is there. But I missed that the labelRelated from your SKOS-XL proposal is actually dedicated to relations between labels as reources. Mea maxima culpa, I was too quick. My guilt being acknowledged, I would however blame you ;-) for having exactly the same property and class names in both skos: and skos-xl: namespaces. I find this really confusing, even if of course that's perfectly legal. Cheers, Antoine > Hi Antoine, > > I didn't forget about the skos:seeLabelRelation property in my SKOS-XL sketch [2]. There is no need to mention it. > > Consider the following two graphs. > > First graph, using SKOS (Core) only ... > > ex:MyConcept a skos:Concept; > skos:prefLabel "FAO"@en; > skos:altLabel "Food and Agriculture Organisation"@en; > skos:seeLabelRelation ex:MyLabelRelation. > > ex:MyLabelRelation a skos:LabelRelation; > skos:labelRelated "FAO"@en; > skos:labelRelated "Food and Agriculture Organisation"@en. > > Second graph, using SKOS (Core) plus SKOS-XL ... > > ex:MyConcept a skos:Concept; > skos-xl:prefLabel ex:LabelX; > skos-xl:altLabel ex:LabelY; > skos:seeLabelRelation ex:MyLabelRelation. > > ex:MyLabelRelation a skos:LabelRelation; > skos-xl:labelRelated ex:LabelX; > skos-xl:labelRelated ex:LabelY. > > ex:LabelX a skos-xl:Label; > skos-xl:plainLiteralForm "FAO"@en. > > ex:LabelY a skos-xl:Label; > skos-xl:plainLiteralForm "Food and Agriculture Organisation"@en. > > Note that the second graph entails the first. > > Cheers, > > Alistair. > > -- > Alistair Miles > Research Associate > Science and Technology Facilities Council > Rutherford Appleton Laboratory > Harwell Science and Innovation Campus > Didcot > Oxfordshire OX11 0QX > United Kingdom > Web: http://purl.org/net/aliman > Email: a.j.miles@rl.ac.uk > Tel: +44 (0)1235 445440 > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Antoine Isaac [mailto:aisaac@few.vu.nl] >> Sent: 23 November 2007 22:31 >> To: Miles, AJ (Alistair) >> Cc: Jon Phipps; Daniel Rubin; public-swd-wg@w3.org; Alan Ruttenberg >> Subject: Re: SKOS-XL (was RE: SKOS/ synonym provenance >> (ISSUE-27 AnnotationOnLabel)) >> >> Hi Alistair, >> >> Apart from the formal concerns I expressed in my previous >> mail, I just wanted to say that I had also some technical >> doubts. Mainly regarding the correspondence between the >> "label-as-resource" pattern and the "minimal label relation" >> one: your rules do not consider the attachment of the >> ex:fooRelation to the considered instances of skos:Concept. >> >> This raises again the issue I mentioned once about the >> minimal label relation [4] also lacking a story. >> What is the story for contextualizing the "reified" >> relationship between labels? In [4] the relationship resource >> is linked - via a seeLabelRelation property - to the concept >> to which the labels themselves are attached. >> I already mentioned the problem in a telecon. If I remember >> correctly, you said that you would attach the reified >> relationship to each of the concepts to which the original >> literals are attached. This can be doable, but I think it >> might raise some problems one day, and in any case miss sound >> justification. The fact that you forgot it in [2] could be a hint :-p >> >> Is it because the problem is not important, contrary to what >> I think, or is there really something? >> [And of course this should not hide the fact that the >> "label-as-resource" or "simple extension" lacks a story. Here >> I agree with you...] >> >> Cheers, >> >> Antoine >> >> [4] >> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/SkosDesign/RelationshipsBet >> weenLabels/ProposalFour >> [5] >> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2007Nov/0063.html >> >> >>> Hi Jon, >>> >>> You just reminded me, after the amsterdam f2f I wrote up a >>> >> specification for an *extension module* for SKOS, which I >> think captures your requirements: >> >>> [2] <http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/SkosDesign/SKOS-XL> >>> >>> This takes the many-to-one position [3]. >>> >>> My current feeling is *not* to include anything like this >>> >> in the main SKOS recommendation -- i.e. to limit the SKOS >> recommendation to *only* dealing with labels as RDF plain >> literals, which would keep it smaller and simpler. >> >>> I think it would then be quite reasonable to publish >>> >> something like SKOS-XL as a separate, stand-alone, extension >> to SKOS, for advanced users. >> >>> The SWDWG could itself publish such an extension, or anyone >>> >> from the SKOS community could do so. E.g. the FAO used their >> own extension to represent something like this. >> >>> If the SWDWG left it to the community, to help promote >>> >> discovery and >> >>> convergence, the SWDWG could set up a wiki page where >>> >> members of the >> >>> community could "register" their SKOS extensions ... or we >>> >> could even >> >>> use your metadata registry to do that :) >>> >>> Finally, note that [1] doesn't have any "story" to it -- >>> >> it's just bare bones. Even as an extension module, [1] would >> need a story to go with it. To be even considered for >> inclusion in SKOS proper, it would need a very good story. I >> haven't got a story at all the moment, and I haven't heard >> anyone tell one yet either, so my position as stated in the >> summary of [3] still holds. Have you got a good story? >> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> Al. >>> >>> [3] >>> >>> >> <http://isegserv.itd.rl.ac.uk/public/skos/2007/10/f2f/label-relations. >> >>> html> >>> >>> -- >>> Alistair Miles >>> Research Associate >>> Science and Technology Facilities Council Rutherford Appleton >>> Laboratory Harwell Science and Innovation Campus Didcot Oxfordshire >>> OX11 0QX United Kingdom >>> Web: http://purl.org/net/aliman >>> Email: a.j.miles@rl.ac.uk >>> Tel: +44 (0)1235 445440 >>> >>> >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Jon Phipps [mailto:jonphipps@gmail.com] On Behalf Of >>>> >> Jon Phipps >> >>>> Sent: 20 November 2007 13:17 >>>> To: Miles, AJ (Alistair) >>>> Cc: Antoine Isaac; Daniel Rubin; public-swd-wg@w3.org; Alan >>>> Ruttenberg >>>> Subject: Re: SKOS/ synonym provenance (ISSUE-27 AnnotationOnLabel) >>>> >>>> Al, >>>> >>>> I'd like to suggest in the light of further discussion that we >>>> reconsider Guus's Simple Extension Proposal[1]. Perhaps if we were >>>> able to declare skos:prefLabel as having an owl:equivalentProperty >>>> relationship to the rdfs:label property of a skos >>>> >> prefTerm, then this >> >>>> would allow us to effectively join a 'term' graph to a concept by >>>> asserting a typed relationship without impacting the current >>>> semantics of prefLabel. I think this might be far more >>>> >> effective than >> >>>> simply allowing a resource to be the object of a >>>> >> skos:label property. >> >>>> I believe that Antoine had drawn this pattern on a notepad >>>> >> at the f2f >> >>>> but it didn't provoke much discussion. As I recall the main >>>> objections to Guus's proposal had to do with problems with the >>>> overloading of 'term' and the fact that it's subject to >>>> >> rather broad >> >>>> interpretation. Perhaps rather than simply rejecting the >>>> >> proposal, we >> >>>> could see if we can't adjust the naming to be more >>>> >> acceptable wrt to >> >>>> the apparent ambiguity of the term 'term' -- >>>> >> prefLexicalTerm perhaps. >> >>>> Personally I'm far more comfortable allowing the joining >>>> >> of a term to >> >>>> a concept to both maintain and allow relationships between >>>> >> terms that >> >>>> can't be effectively expressed with the more generalizable >>>> >> conceptual >> >>>> relationships supported by skos than I am with the currently >>>> supported solution. It seems to me that there are far too many >>>> instances where publishing a concept using skos involves >>>> >> enough of a >> >>>> loss of useful data that it would present a barrier to >>>> >> acceptance of >> >>>> skos. >>>> >>>> --Jon >>>> >>>> [1] >>>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2007May/0057.html >>>> >>>> On Nov 20, 2007, at 7:40 AM, Miles, AJ ((Alistair)) wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > > >
Received on Tuesday, 4 December 2007 15:28:34 UTC