RE: SKOS-XL (was RE: SKOS/ synonym provenance (ISSUE-27 AnnotationOnLabel))

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 14:59:27 UTC