Mappings (was IVOAT)
Frederic V. Hessman
Hessman at Astro.physik.Uni-Goettingen.DE
Fri Nov 30 07:09:11 PST 2007
> Hi Rick, All,
> It is good to see Rick include his mappings from the UCD1
> vocabulary to the IVOAT. However, I do not agree with the way in
> which he has linked the two vocabularies from a ideological point
> of view. (I am saying nothing about whether the terms in the two
> vocabularies that he has linked makes sense or not, I am
> concentrating on the way in which they are linked.)
Then it worked! The whole point was to provoke a response to an
issue we needed to address not that we're getting down to brass
> Rick has declared the mappings using the skos:related property and
> embedded these within the skos version of the vocabulary. First
> of all, I feel that the mappings between vocabularies should be
> kept completely separate from the skos version of the vocabulary.
> This allows us to Concentrate on generating clean versions of the
> vocabularies. Change the mappings without needing to amend the skos
> version of the vocabulary. Use different mappings in different
> circumstances if this meets our needs.
Good point - hadn't thought of that. Does this suggests, however,
that we'll need a full matrix of RDF conversion files?
A.rdf B.rdf C.rdf
A.rdf N/A A2B.rdf A2C.rdf
B.rdf B2A.rdf N/A B2C.rdf
C.rdf C2A.rdf C2B.rdf N/A
Ugh! Thank goodness I'm only really interested in tokens....
> Second, I feel that the skos:related property is the wrong way to
> relate concepts in different vocabularies. My interpretation of the
> skos core, although it is not explicitly stated, is that the
> properties skos:related, skos:broader, and skos:narrower, are for
> defining relationships between concepts in a single vocabulary. We
> should be looking to use the SKOS mapping vocabulary specification
>  for this purpose. This provides several properties for mapping
> between concepts in different vocabularies. (I am in the process of
> declaring such mappings between the A&A Keywords and the AOIM
> vocabularies. Once I have completed this I will send it around the
Sorry - my attention span for W3C documentation is obviously
limited. And I thought only young people had this problem.....
More information about the semantics