Vocabulary mappings

[Rob Seaman]

I suggest that the language be very clear that while mappings may be  
present, they are not mandated.  In general, the language regarding  
the various vocabularies and derived data products should be flexible  
- unless there are specific points that we want to emphasize.

Relaxing the language then decouples the decision about which mappings  
and which vocabularies, both from the document and from each other.

Rob
--

On Jul 2, 2008, at 2:39 AM, Alasdair Gray wrote:

> Hi,
>
> In the introduction to section 4 of the current editor's draft of  
> the vocabularies working draft I have come across the statement,
> "We provide a set of SKOS files representing the vocabularies which  
> have been developed, and mappings between them."
> This scares me, because at present we only have one mapping file,  
> linking the A&A keywords to the AVM. (Generating the inverse would  
> be a straighforward automated process.)
>
> Are we going to provide mappings between any of the other  
> vocabularies? If so, which ones and who's going to generate them?  
> (The mapping editor tool at http://explicator.dcs.gla.ac.uk/code/  
> will help with this process.)
>
> Best regards,
>
> Alasdair
>
> Dr Alasdair J. G. Gray
> agray at dcs.gla.ac.uk
> http://www.dcs.gla.ac.uk/~agray
>
>
>