> From: Dublin Core Social Tagging
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Pete Johnston
> Sent: 03 November, 2006 12:57
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [DC-SOCIAL-TAGGING] The "social" in social
> tagging (Was RE: Welcome!)
> The semantics of dc:subject
> (and the other DCMI properties) is/are defined/managed by the
> DCMI Usage Board.
Yes, but proposals can be put forth for community review.
> But I don't think I'd go as far as saying that dc:identifier,
> dc:subject and dc:type are subproperties of other:tag. Yes, I
> was suggesting that some "has-tag" relations are "has-genre"
> relations (and so on), but _not_ that all
> "has-genre"/"has-identifier"/"has-topic" relations (and so
> on) are "has-tag" relations.
But, if a tag can take on the form: has-genre, has-identifier,
has-topic, then this would seem to imply that a tag is super-
property of the others or possible intersects with them when
there is a not-all association.
The question on my mind is: how are you going to rectify or make
an association when a tag takes on the form: has-genre, has-
identifier, has-topic? For example, if a tag takes on the form,
has-identifier, then I probably want to include it as part of
my identifier searching and indexing. If there isn't a sub-
property relationship, then how can I identify associations
between other:tag and dc:identifier, dc:type and dc:subject
to do something semantically intelligent?
A possible solution might be to use a similar model for has-tag
as the VES (Vocabulary Encoding Scheme) model. Thus:
<dc:identifier> <*:tag/> </dc:identifier>
<dc:relation> <*:tag/> </dc:relation>
<dc:subject> <*:tag/> </dc:subject>
<dc:type> <*:tag/> </dc:type>
or
<dc:identifier|relation|subject|type>
<rdf:Description>
<rdf:type rdf:resource='http://www.flickr.com/photos/tags/'/>
<rdf:value />
</rdf:Description>
</dc:identifier|relation|subject|type>
although this inverts the relationship to say *:tag is-a-kind-of
dc:identifier, dc:relation, dc:subject, or dc:type. Maybe that
does make more sense and would allow you to do something
semantically intelligent...
Andy.
