vocabulary schema

[AaronWilton]

We are currently using gbif's thesaurus.xsd - it lacks an attribute for indicating relationships between terms/concepts.

It has an "any" in the schema so we can add whatever we want, but I not a fan of that freeform expansion - should make our own version based on extension of the gbif schema?

[AaronWilton]

relates to #19

[nielsklazenga]

Yes, agreed.

[AaronWilton]

thinking about the hierarchy of vocabulary terms, wonder if we could us dc:isPartOf ? Or create our own or borrow from somewhere else...?

(need to play with extending the gbif schema - I can do it easily if I edit their to use complex types rather than references, but am struggling to see how to do it if I don't do that.... any tips?)

[nielsklazenga]

If the GBIF schema let's you do what you want to do, I would just stick with it for now.

For the other thing, if I am correct about what you are trying to do, I think skos:broader and skos:narrower might fit the bill. It might actually be good to do the vocabularies entirely in SKOS (maybe not right now). Every term could be a skos:Concept and an entire vocabulary a skos:ConceptScheme.

[nielsklazenga]

@prefix : <http://hiscom.chah.org.au/hispid/vocabularies/establishment_means/> .
@prefix rdf: <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#> .
@prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> .
@prefix skos: <http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#> .
@prefix owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#> .
@prefix foaf: <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/> .
@prefix dcterms: <http://purl.org/dc/terms/> .
@prefix xs: <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema> .

:establishmentMeansVocab rdf:type skos:ConceptScheme ;
  dc:title "Establishment means vocabulary" ;
  dcterms:created "2016-02-09"^^xs:date ;
  rdfs:isDefinedBy <http://hiscom.chah.org.au/hispid/vocabularies> .

:native a skos:Concept ;
  skos:inScheme :establishmentMeansVocab ;
  skos:prefLabel "native"@en ;
  skos:definition """Naturally occurring in a particular region or ecosystem."""@en ;
  skos:exactMatch <http://rs.gbif.org/vocabulary/gbif/establishment_means/native> .

:introduced a skos:Concept ;
  skos:inScheme :establishmentMeansVocab ;
  skos:prefLabel "introduced"@en ;
  skos:definition """Introduced with human help (intentionally or accidentally) to a new 
   place or new type of habitat where it was not previously found."""@en ;
  skos:exactMatch <http://rs.gbif.org/vocabulary/gbif/establishment_means/introduced> .

:naturalised a skos:Concept ;
  skos:inScheme :establishmentMeansVocab ;
  skos:prefLabel "naturalised"@en ;
  skos:prefLabel "naturalized"@en-US ;
  skos:definition """Subclass of introduced: The organism reproduces naturally."""@en ;
  skos:exactMatch <http://rs.gbif.org/vocabulary/gbif/establishment_means/naturalised> .

:managed a skos:Concept ;
  skos:inScheme :establishmentMeansVocab ;
  skos:prefLabel "managed"@en ;
  skos:altLabel "cultivated"@en ;
  skos:definition """Subclass of introduced: The organism maintains its presence through 
   intentional  cultivation or husbandry."""@en ;
  skos:exactMatch <http://rs.gbif.org/vocabulary/gbif/establishment_means/managed> .

:invasive a skos:Concept ;
  skos:inScheme :establishmentMeansVocab ;
  skos:prefLabel "invasive"@en ;
  skos:definition [
    rdf:value """Subclass of introduced: The organism is having a deleterious impact 
      on another organism, multiple organisms or the ecosystem as a whole."""@en ;
    dcterms:source <http://rs.gbif.org/vocabulary/gbif/establishment_means/invasive>
  ] ;
  skos: exactMatch  <http://rs.gbif.org/vocabulary/gbif/establishment_means/invasive> ;
  skos:editorialNote [
    rdf:value """I have added this in order to have the complete GBIF vocabulary,
      but I am not sure 'invasive' belongs in an establishment means vocabulary."""@en ;
    dcterms:creator _:NielsKlazenga ;
    dcterms:created "2016-02-09"^^xs:date
  ] .

:uncertain a skos:Concept ;
  skos:inScheme :establishmentMeansVocab ;
  skos:prefLabel "uncertain"@en ;
  skos:definition """Origin of organism uncertain"""@en ;
  skos:exactMatch <http://rs.gbif.org/vocabulary/gbif/establishment_means/uncertain> .

# I have separated the relationships  
:naturalised skos:broader :introduced .
:managed skos:broader :introduced .
:invasive skos:broader :introduced .

:establishmentMeansVocab skos:editorialNote [
  rdf:value """The SKOS primer says somewhere that exactMatch, closeMatch etc. are used to
    indicate relationships between different SKOS Concepts. The definitions of all these 
    properties and the mappingRelation property of which they are subproperties (directly or
    indirectly) simply says 'concepts' and doesn't define an rdfs:range for the property, so 
    I think it is fine to use for semantic relationships with non-SKOS concepts as well"""@en ;
  dcterms:creator _:NielsKlazenga ;
  dcterms:created "2016-02-09"
] .

_:NielsKlazenga a foaf:Person ;
  foaf:name "Niels Klazenga" .

[AaronWilton]

agree with both points

[nielsklazenga]

I actually started liking it more and more when I was doing it. Maybe not for right now though. Later we can probably create the GBIF format from this (once it's turned into RDF-XML).

[nielsklazenga]

Similar to issue #38.