ISSUE-129

Last Call Comment: S9 skos:ConceptScheme is disjoint with skos:Concept

State:

CLOSED

Product:

SKOS

Raised by:

Alistair Miles

Opened on:

2008-09-30

Description:

Raised by Lourens van der Meij in [1]:

"""
A comment on
"S9 skos:ConceptScheme is disjoint with skos:Concept "

I have considered modelling complex thesauri containing sub thesauri 
describing different aspects of objects (persons,subjects,..) as
a general concept scheme having sub thesauri as top concepts.
(often the pre-skos version is organized as a tree with top level
children nodes that are the aspects themselves).

ct:complex_thesaurus rdf:type skos:ConceptScheme
ct:complex_thesaurus skos:hasTopConcept ct:subjects
ct:complex_thesaurus skos:hasTopConcept ct:persons
ct:complex_thesaurus skos:hasTopConcept ...

then,

ct:subjects rdf:type skos:Concept,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

but I would also like
ct:subjects" rdf:type skos:ConceptScheme

I would put all ct:complex_thesaurus concepts skos:inScheme ct:complex_thesaurus

ct:subject1 rdf:type skos:Concept
ct:subject1 skos:broader ct:subjects
ct:subject1 skos:inScheme ct:subjects
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
ct:subject1 skos:inScheme ct:complex_thesaurus

Then, ct:complex_thesaurus would be a proper conceptscheme with tree
but its subtree ct:subjects would also be a proper conceptscheme.

Why? Because I would dislike having to define two distinct URIs for
the subject that is a topconcept of ct:complex_thesaurus and
the subject that is a Conceptscheme that defines all subjects concepts that are
descendants of the ct:subjects concept. I would then need to define some ad hoc 
property linking both subject uris. 
"""

Requires discussion.

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2008Sep/0014.html

Related emails:

1. ISSUE-129: Last Call Comment (from dean+cgi@w3.org on 2008-09-30)
2. Re: SKOS comment (from alistair.miles@zoo.ox.ac.uk on 2008-09-30)
3. ISSUE-129 draft response (from sean.bechhofer@manchester.ac.uk on 2008-10-06)
4. Re: ISSUE-129 draft response (from alistair.miles@zoo.ox.ac.uk on 2008-10-07)
5. Real List of No Changes! (from sean.bechhofer@manchester.ac.uk on 2008-10-14)
6. Re: swd minutes 2008-10-14 (from alistair.miles@zoo.ox.ac.uk on 2008-10-15)
7. Re: SKOS comment [ISSUE-129] (from sean.bechhofer@manchester.ac.uk on 2008-10-17)
8. Re: SKOS comment (s) from PFWG [ISSUE-129] (from sean.bechhofer@manchester.ac.uk on 2008-10-20)
9. Re: SKOS comment [ISSUE-129] (from lourens@cs.vu.nl on 2008-10-31)

Related notes: