27 messages in org.w3.public-esw-thesRE: revisions and change in skos| From | Sent On | Attachments |
|---|---|---|
| Rob Tice | Sep 28, 2008 11:56 pm | |
| De Smedt Johan | Sep 29, 2008 12:15 am | |
| Sini, Margherita (KCEW) | Sep 29, 2008 1:30 am | |
| Aida Slavic | Sep 29, 2008 2:13 am | |
| De Smedt Johan | Sep 29, 2008 2:26 am | |
| Sini, Margherita (KCEW) | Sep 29, 2008 2:32 am | |
| Rob Tice | Sep 29, 2008 3:30 am | |
| De Smedt Johan | Sep 29, 2008 4:05 am | |
| Aida Slavic | Sep 29, 2008 4:06 am | |
| Rob Tice | Sep 29, 2008 4:53 am | |
| Sini, Margherita (KCEW) | Sep 29, 2008 5:05 am | |
| Sini, Margherita (KCEW) | Sep 29, 2008 10:48 am | |
| Houghton,Andrew | Sep 29, 2008 11:07 am | |
| Sini, Margherita (KCEW) | Sep 29, 2008 9:13 pm | |
| Alan Ruttenberg | Sep 29, 2008 9:29 pm | |
| Sini, Margherita (KCEW) | Sep 29, 2008 11:00 pm | |
| Alan Ruttenberg | Sep 29, 2008 11:26 pm | |
| Antoine Isaac | Sep 30, 2008 2:55 am | |
| Stephen Bounds | Sep 30, 2008 3:49 am | |
| Leonard Will | Sep 30, 2008 4:43 am | |
| Panzer,Michael | Oct 1, 2008 8:19 am | |
| Joseph Tennis | Oct 1, 2008 1:02 pm | |
| Sini, Margherita (KCEW) | Oct 1, 2008 1:04 pm | |
| Alan Ruttenberg | Oct 2, 2008 3:16 am | |
| Antoine Isaac | Oct 2, 2008 7:23 am | |
| Alistair Miles | Oct 2, 2008 9:29 am | |
| Sini, Margherita (KCEW) | Oct 2, 2008 11:27 am |
| Subject: | RE: revisions and change in skos | |
|---|---|---|
| From: | Sini, Margherita (KCEW) (Marg...@fao.org) | |
| Date: | Sep 29, 2008 5:05:29 am | |
| List: | org.w3.public-esw-thes | |
I see,
In this case, I suppose, we should make use of the mapping... We should have somewhere (possibly together with the current valid scheme) the mappings done between 2 schemes (or 2 concepts in the same scheme if this is the case)... Then I believe we have 2 solutions:
1) programmatically replace in the system any previous reference to the uri of concept 'a' with the uri for concept 'b'. --> solution that i do not like very much (and actually would not make use of the mapping)
2) modify the way the system make searches, and if the system find a mapped concept, should look for concept 'a' and concept 'b' so to get all resources...
Hope this helps Margherita
-----Original Message----- From: Rob Tice [mailto:rob....@k-int.com] Sent: Mon 9/29/2008 13:53 To: Sini, Margherita (KCEW) Cc: publ...@w3.org Subject: RE: revisions and change in skos
Hi Margherita
Thanks for the response.
When it comes to change control one of our main use cases is so that other systems can gain all the info that they need to ensure that updates and mappings are cascaded to end users of the reference data.
I can see that your proposed solution could be a usable work around in certain cases, however our actual goal is to expose a link between concept a and b to inform systems that any previous reference to the uri of concept a should now use the uri for concept b. To that end for us the deprecation part of the work around is actually a different use case.
How do you/the list think we should present this link info?
Best Regards
Rob
-----Original Message----- From: Sini, Margherita (KCEW) [mailto:Marg...@fao.org] Sent: 29 September 2008 09:30 To: Rob Tice Cc: publ...@w3.org Subject: RE: revisions and change in skos
For point 2. I would suggest:
- leave 'concept a' as deprecated. Its uri will remain but some status should be set as deprecated. No URI can be eliminated. - assign a new uri to concept 'b' and keep 'a' as non preferred label for it.
Hope this helps, Regards Margherita
-----Original Message----- From: publ...@w3.org on behalf of Rob Tice Sent: Mon 9/29/2008 08:57 To: publ...@w3.org Cc: Subject: revisions and change in skos
Dear list members
The background to my questions is that we are currently considering developing a 'SKOS resolver' (for want of a better description) for our terminology management solution to sit alongside the other formats we currently implement.
This has however thrown up some questions.
As part of this requirement we (ideally)need to: 1 Expose versioning information 2 Allow identification of terminology changes between versions
As these are parts of our existing solution which are already exposed using other formats.
So...
1. How should we expose versioning information given that uri's for concepts are fixed (please don’t say timestamps on uri's :))
2. How should we identify and manage change between revisions of concept schemes as this 'seems' to result in imprecision. e.g. a concept 'a' is currently in thes 'A' and only has a preferred label. A new revision of thes 'A' is published and what was concept 'a' is now a non preferred concept and thus becomes simply a non preferred label for a new concept 'b'.
It seems to me that this operation loses some of the semantic meaning of the change as all references to the concept id of 'concept a' would be lost as it now is only a non preferred
label of a different concept with a different id (concept 'b').
Any comments would be much appreciated.
Best Regards
Rob
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-
Rob Tice, Director Knowledge Integration Ltd 35 Paradise Street Sheffield South Yorkshire S3 8PZ email: rob....@k-int.com Tel: +44 (0)870 803 4661 http://www.k-int.com <http://www.k-int.com/> <http://www.k-int.com/>
No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 270.7.4/1695 - Release Date: 27/09/2008 13:11
No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 270.7.5/1696 - Release Date: 28/09/2008 13:30
No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 270.7.5/1696 - Release Date: 28/09/2008 13:30