Last Call Comment: Mappings

Raised by:
Sean Bechhofer
Opened on:
Raised by Michael Panzer [1]:

6. Mappings

The problem of restricting SKOS to one-to-one mappings has already been
raised as ISSUE-131. We share the concerns expressed there.

We also see potential problems in deriving the mapping relations
skos:broadMatch and skos:narrowMatch from skos:broader and
skos:narrower. In ISO standard and current practices many multilingual
thesauri did not use broader or narrower to indicate the mapping
relations. SKOS should revisit those standards and follow the current
standards' development to make sure SKOS is consistent in representing
the indicators used by standards (and the thesauri following those
standards) for so many years.  

In addition, when mapping systems that are structurally heterogeneous
(e.g., classification systems and thesauri), the links established
through mappings have no hierarchical implications at all.

Currently, skos:broader is used both for the hierarchical relationship
between classes as well as between concepts. Mapping relations that are
subproperties of skos:broader/skos:narrower are not able to sufficiently
support interoperability between structurally heterogeneous systems.

In addition, many different indicators of degree of mapping have been
used in integrated vocabularies, e.g., major mapping, minor mapping,
alternative mapping, and overlapping.  These may make the mapping
properties even more complicated. The solution here might again be to
extend mapping properties.


Related emails:
  1. ISSUE-186: Last Call Comment: Mappings (from on 2008-10-08)
  2. Re: SKOS comment: Last Call Working Draft (from on 2008-10-08)
  3. Re: ISSUE-186: Last Call Comment: Mappings (from on 2008-10-08)
  4. LC Comments: Classification Schemes (from on 2008-10-09)
  5. Re: LC Comments: Classification Schemes (from on 2008-10-13)
  6. Re: ISSUE-186: Last Call Comment: Mappings (from on 2008-10-17)
  7. Re: ISSUE-186: Last Call Comment: Mappings (from on 2008-10-22)
  8. Re: ISSUE-186: Last Call Comment: Mappings (from on 2008-10-22)
  9. Re: ISSUE-186 [Re: SKOS comment: Last Call Working Draft] (from on 2008-12-02)
  10. [SKOS] Update on Last Call Comments (from on 2008-12-02)

Related notes:

2008-11-10: ACTION: Accept

2008-12-02: CHANGE-TYPE: None

2008-12-02: RESOLUTION: The current design for SKOS is based on a perceived consensus for mapping between vocabularies, which is to ground the different types of mapping relationship in the notions of hierarchical and associative relationships, and we believe that this consensus is consistent with existing standards. SKOS mapping relations cannot solve the heterogeneity of vocabularies and it is not possible to prevent wrong usage of the mapping relations. However, we think that the mapping relations do provide an important mechanism. Also, people can use, next to the broader/narrower, other mapping relations such as closeMatch and relatedMatch, which might be more suitable in heterogeneous cases. We agree that extending the mapping properties might very well be a good idea, but we prefer to leave this to developers. See also the section in the SKOS primer on extension mechanisms.

2008-12-16: Closed with no response from commenter.

2008-12-16: COMMENTER-RESPONSE: None