Threads

[Ed Shaya]

> our Note was about a 'Standard Vocabulary': in any discussion of a
> vocabulary, SKOS and OWL are certainly relevant, more so than UCD-like
> tokens. (Indeed, maybe it is time to convert UCDs into a more standard form,
> like SKOS, and drop the tokenised form altogether?)

I agree with this. The longer we persist with UCDs the further behind we 
get technologically.  UCD work began before SKOS and OWL, but well after
RDF was a W3C Recommendation (1999).  I looked through my e-mails and 
found that I was reporting to the NVO about the many fields and business 
that were successfully using DAML/OWL in late 2002.  So we are a decade 
behind and it is looking like we are proceeding on to a second decade.

This SV appears to be pushing into adding properties like isElementOf 
and isPossibly and isNot which are handled by w3c semantics. I think the
motivation was to stay with strings that did not have "<" or ">", but if 
that is so important then one can use Notation3 or Abstract OWL.

Ed
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: eshaya.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 257 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://www.ivoa.net/pipermail/semantics/attachments/20070928/a49d4abf/attachment-0001.vcf>