IAU thesaurus in RDF (an update)

[Alasdair Gray]

The issue of individuals in a thesaurus raises all sorts of questions.

1.  Which do you include/exclude?

2.  What do you do about the ones that you have missed/not yet
discovered?

 

There is also an issue about how to represent individuals in a
thesaurus. 

1.  Are they a concept?

2.  Should they only exist as part of a collection?

 

At the moment, I only have lots of questions about individuals and no
answers and I have spent several days mulling over these issues.

 

Cheers,

 

Alasdair

 

 

Alasdair J G Gray

Research Associate: Explicator Project

Computer Science, University of Glasgow

0141 330 6292

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-semantics at eso.org [mailto:owner-semantics at eso.org] On Behalf
Of Ed Shaya
Sent: 8 October 2007 15:16
To: Frederic V. Hessman; IVOA semantics
Subject: Re: IAU thesaurus in RDF (an update)

 

Rick,

 

Someone asked if there needs to be Individuals.  This already has Sun,

Moon, Earth, Mars and others.  It turns out that there are a few that 

are needed because other terms are so related to them.  Although one

probably could substitute #spicules skos:related #stars for #spicules

skos:related #Sun, etc.  But, maybe we should have both.  But it is 

clear that one should have at least a few Individuals.

 

Talking about individuals.  There is a #velocity_of_light.  Do we need

velocity_of_light_in_vacuum to distinguish from in_medium?

 

infrared_radiation should have broader electromagnetic_radiation, as

ultraviolet_radiation has.  Is infrared_radiation synonymous with 

infrared_emission?  I don't see a way for SKOS to say SameAs.  How does 

one say iau:stars sameas cds:stars?

 

Ed

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.ivoa.net/pipermail/semantics/attachments/20071010/d3676010/attachment-0001.html>