skosclass:hasDomainConcept and skosclass:hasRangeConcept

[Benedikt Kämpgen]

Hello,

For extending SKOS towards definition of classification hierarchies [1], you
define skosclass:hasDomainConcept and skosclass:hasRangeConcept as having a
Concept as domain and a ConceptAssociation as range. In Reification you
typically do it the other way round. Any reason for doing so, considering
the current names hasXXX?

Best,

Benedikt

[1] <http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/ISO_Extensions_to_SKOS>

--
AIFB, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT)
Phone: +49 721 608-47946
Email: benedikt...@kit.edu
Web: http://www.aifb.kit.edu/web/Hauptseite/en

[Richard Cyganiak]

Benedikt,

I agree that it would be nicer to switch this around, so that hasDomainConcept and hasRangeConcepts are properties of the ConceptAssociation, rather than being properties of the two associated concepts.

Franck, Dan, what do you think? (I'm not sure if you are subscribed to the publishing-statistical-data Google Group, so I'm adding you to cc)

Best,
Richard

[Franck]

Hi Dan, Richard, Dominik and everybody, merry Christmas to all
It's clearly a mistake I made in the Turtle file : hasDomainConcept
and hasRangeConcept should both have ConceptAssociation as domain and
Concept as range. I will correct that today.
I take this opportunity to elaborate on issue 10 (https://github.com/
FranckCo/SKOSExt/issues/10). I think hasDomainConcept and
hasRangeConcept are not very good names (for example they may cause
confusion with RDFS ranges and domains). I believe that the Neuchâtel
model (http://www1.unece.org/stat/platform/pages/viewpage.action?
pageId=14319930) uses "source" and "target" for this, so I would
suggest to rename the properties 'hasSourceConcept' and
'hasTargetConcept'.
Franck

[Richard Cyganiak]

Hi Franck,

Happy new year!

On 26 Dec 2011, at 10:21, Franck wrote:
> I take this opportunity to elaborate on issue 10 (https://github.com/
> FranckCo/SKOSExt/issues/10). I think hasDomainConcept and
> hasRangeConcept are not very good names (for example they may cause
> confusion with RDFS ranges and domains). I believe that the Neuchâtel
> model (http://www1.unece.org/stat/platform/pages/viewpage.action?
> pageId=14319930) uses "source" and "target" for this, so I would
> suggest to rename the properties 'hasSourceConcept' and
> 'hasTargetConcept'.

I'm ok with this change, although I found hasDomainConcept and hasRangeConcept acceptable as well.

All the best,
Richard