I changed the subject line is this point is really just about one
particular aspect:
On 6 March 2012 21:57, Thomas Baker <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> I would indeed prefer to de-emphasize the only two existing terms in the
> current DCAM namespace -- dcam:VocabularyEncodingScheme and dcam:memberOf -- in
> favor of the more widely known and understood skos:ConceptScheme and
> skos:inScheme.
This change would (I think) more than a "syntactic" one.
From
http://www.w3.org/TR/skos-reference/#schemes
> A SKOS concept scheme can be viewed as an aggregation of one or more SKOS concepts
And from
http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-terms/#H8
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.
Now, I note that the rdfs:domain of the skos:inScheme property is
_not_ specified so there is no formal inference that the subject of an
skos:inScheme triple is a skos:Concept, and e.g. from
http://www.w3.org/TR/skos-reference/#L648
> The membership of an instance of skosxl:Label within a SKOS concept scheme can be asserted using the skos:inScheme property.
All the same, I do think this represents a slight change from the current DCAM.
IIRC, we did have discussions about this aspect of the VES notion when
we were working on the spec, and (for better or worse) opted to go for
the wider notion. (I guess this is related to the
"conceptualisation-of-place" v "actual place"/"foaf:focus" question
that I occasionally fret about!)
Anyway, I wouldn't strongly object to the change but I think it is
worth noting that it (probably?) represents a "narrowing" of the
current notion of a VES.
Pete
--
Pete Johnston
|