On 8 March 2012 13:37, Thomas Baker <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 08, 2012 at 08:57:22AM +0000, Pete Johnston wrote:
>> And from
>> A DCAM VES is
>> > An enumerated set of resources
>> i.e. a DCAM VES is a set/aggregation of things of any type (concepts,
>> people, places, documents) whereas a SKOS concept scheme is an
>> aggregation of concepts/conceptual things.
> Ah, but SKOS Concepts are not formally disjoint with non-conceptual things.
> Put another way, by saying that something is a SKOS Concept one is not actually
> saying that it is a "conceptual thing". If a SKOS Concept is informally
> understood to be a conceptual thing, that is fine, but the SKOS data model does
> not make a formal distinction.
But I think in practice we start to run into some peculiar situations
if we end up saying that a resource like
has a "has-broader-concept"/"is-narrower-concept-than" relation with
and that same thing also has a "is-located-in" relation with
(especially if people start applying "dates of creation" etc (which I
appreciate the LoC example does not))
I don't object to the suggested change - I think it's what we should
have done in the first place (despite my probably having argued to the
contrary at the time!)
But for myself, I would shy away from using the construct where it
might result in these sorts of mental gymnastics!