Closed laurentlefort closed 6 years ago
You cannot avoid a local closed world assumption in cases like this, so the information attached to a xkos:ConceptAssociation
is about the whole set of diectly connected concepts. Prov-O Qualified terms can be useful when deriving normal skos mapping statements (e.g. skos:exactMatch
) from a xkos:ConceptAssociation
.
My main concern in this scenario is that if the xkos:ConceptAssociation node is used as the “container” for richer attributes (e.g. justification or confidence level or even weights) then it will not be possible to know if the extra assertions attached to it (literals or links to other entities) should be interpreted as assertions valid for all source or target concepts attached to a node or only to some of them.
An alternative to the currently proposed approach for xkos:ConceptAssociation would be to adapt the qualification pattern used in Prov-O as a mean to capture more information about each individual link.
Prov-O Qualified terms: http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-o/#description-qualified-terms