Should mappings be in this standard?

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Should mappings between vocabularies be in this standard, or left to the future?

The SKOS Core standard does not include any inter-vocabulary mappings, only 
intra-vocabulary 
links (broader/narrower/related).  There is a separate draft document 
describing inter-
vocabulary mappings http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/mapping/spec/ , but this is 
still (early 
2008) in flux.

Question: do we delete all reference to mappings? or refer to the potential 
publication of 
mappings? or include mappings alongside the vocabulary documents published as 
part of this 
standard?

Suggested resolution (Norman): include mappings as non-normative parts of this 
standard, 
published alongside, but separate from, the normative SKOS versions of the 
vocabularies.

Consideration (1): The mappings spec is still in flux, and likely to remain so 
for some time after 
the SKOS core document is standardised

Consideration (2): Norman would hope to see the situation developing where 
there are multiple 
third-party mappings between vocabularies, maintained by specific communities, 
or which 
describe mappings at different levels of granularity, or which represent 
significant (publication-
worthy?) labour on the part of individuals adding value to the network of 
vocabularies.

What steps will reproduce the problem?
1.
2.
3.

What is the expected output? What do you see instead?

Please use labels and text to provide additional information.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by norman.x.gray on 14 Jan 2008 at 5:41

[GoogleCodeExporter]

First, I think it is very important that we state what the differences between 
intra-
and inter-vocabulary mappings are. Whether we include the details of the 
mappings is
a separate issue. What we need to avoid are inter-vocabulary mappings being 
published
as part of the vocabulary.

Second, in the latest editors draft for the skos standard
http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/SKOS/reference/20071223 inter-vocabulary mappings 
are
included. It is likely that these will become part of the final standard.

Original comment by alasdair...@gmail.com on 15 Jan 2008 at 9:19

• Added labels: Milestone-Release1.0
• Removed labels: ****

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Moved to static issues list.  See 
http://www.astro.gla.ac.uk/users/norman/ivoa/vocabularies/issues#mappings-6

Closed here, and marked as a duplicate of that list.

Original comment by norman.x.gray on 14 Feb 2008 at 5:17

• Changed state: Duplicate
• Added labels: ****
• Removed labels: ****