APML and SKOS
J. Trent Adams
Action Group [1] chat room that seems like it'd be of interest here.
The question was asked how well APML plays within the context of the
Simple Knowledge Organization System (SKOS) spec [2].
I searched this group and didn't find a reference to it. Has anyone
given this any thought, yet?
Curious,
Trent
[1] http://groups.google.com/group/dataportabilityactionimplementation
[2] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/SKOS/reference/20080118
Jeff Fedor
Brief snapshot into my thinking -- use SKOS for broader/narrower relationship trees of interests to allow bucketing of broader interests when looking at bigger picture items and narrower interests for specific topics. Hmmn that sounds pretty vague... ok it's approaching end of day and I'm not talking pretty... How about broader for something like a Blog vs Narrow for something like a blog post/entry.
That said I really should read the APML dox again.
j
David Novakovic
Just at a cursory glance I can see several similarities between the
formats. There are several differences too, one of which is critical in
my opinion.
APML could be considered simple-SKOS, except that it has no concept of
triples, an inherent principle of anything based on RDF. That being
said, it'd be easy enough to represent APML data as triples.
The one difference that sticks out in my mind: APML is user friendly as
well as machine friendly.
Perhaps someone could write a SKOS -> APML adapter. Does anyone know of
any in-the-wild usage of SKOS?
David
Jeff Fedor
Phil Barker
David Novakovic wrote:
>
> J. Trent Adams wrote:
>
>> ...
>> The question was asked how well APML plays within the context of the
>> Simple Knowledge Organization System (SKOS) spec [2].
>> ...
>>
> Just at a cursory glance I can see several similarities between the
> formats. There are several differences too, one of which is critical in
> my opinion.
>
> APML could be considered simple-SKOS, except that it has no concept of
> triples, an inherent principle of anything based on RDF. That being
> said, it'd be easy enough to represent APML data as triples.
>
With these comments in mind I wonder (without implying a preference
between the two) whether it is worth looking at zThes as well as SKOS.
Has anyone done so?
zThes allows vocabularies (e.g. thesauri, with a hierarchy of narrower
and broader terms, related terms and preferred/non preferred terms) to
be expressed in XML. See http://zthes.z3950.org/
Phil
> The one difference that sticks out in my mind: APML is user friendly as
> well as machine friendly.
>
> Perhaps someone could write a SKOS -> APML adapter. Does anyone know of
> any in-the-wild usage of SKOS?
>
> David
>
>
> >
>
--
Phil Barker Learning Technology Adviser
ICBL, School of Mathematical and Computer Sciences
Mountbatten Building, Heriot-Watt University,
Edinburgh, EH14 4AS
Tel: 0131 451 3278 Fax: 0131 451 3327
Web: http://www.icbl.hw.ac.uk/~philb/
gdupont
(and same with zThes with limitation to thesaurus) is about to
organize knowledge and APML is about to provide an entry point into
users preferences/interests. That's two (very) different aims (in my
point of view). A connection between the two can be found of course
since APML could refer to a specific SKOS description of concepts (and
thus provide user's interests in those concepts) and interoperability
can be found by using optional URI to lik APML to SKOS.
Am I missing something ?
GDupont
David P. Novakovic
TSchultz55
very limited) , I agree GDupont. We can view APML and SKOS as
complementaries. This is why I'm a huge fan of the APML 1.0 Spec
"URI" attribute, as it lets you embed semantic resources directly into
a concept without inciting a ton of overhead. Because of this, there
is always that prospect of a "linkage" between APML and any RDF/OWL-
based format.
I ultimately believe that the exploitation of semantic resources can
enable APML to make smarter, more complex decisions in terms of
developing implicit concepts. We just have to develop that
functionality!
Tim
Jeff Fedor
j