utype questions

[Roy Williams]

Frederic Hessman wrote:
> Sorry to dig back into the utype question, but why isn't the use of 
> multiple, translatable vocabularies a la SKOS the ideal (indeed only) 
> solution?  Don't want user readability, don't want to enforce a single 
> usage, don't need an ontology, don't want to restrict mixing and 
> matching as long as I can match what's been mixed, just need a good 
> label.   Or am I being naive and/or single-minded?
>
> Rick
>
Rick et al

Interesting thread you have started! So here is my 2 cents:

-- Utypes is a system for precise, formal descriptions of data 
structures so computers can find them.

-- Vocabulary is a classification system that is often probabilistic in 
usage (or should be).

So it is oil and water, no? Then the question is less about eliminating 
the boundary between these ways of thinking, but rather what happens at 
the boundary. Perhaps we can ask the question of how to link in each 
direction.

The Utypes people might like to say that their quantity derives from 
theoretical models of radio-quite AGN. They want to link to:
 http://eurovotech.org/objects-structure#RadioQuietAGN

The Vocabulary people might like to say that their idea of spectral 
resolution is based on the IVOA spectral model, specifically they want 
to link to Spectral.Resolution.RefVal

How can the two sides cite each other so that we can refer to technical 
and semantic concepts from each side to the other? How I can use these 
special words for my own purposes: if I can choose to go with Utype *or* 
Vocabulary, which provides more services? How can I get a definition?

Cheers
Roy

-- 

California Institute of Technology
626 395 3670