Re: Vocab AND Ontology?

From: Ed Shaya <eshaya-at-umd.edu>
Date: Tue, 09 Oct 2007 16:57:12 -0400


Rob Seaman wrote:
>
> Rather than adding to the Thesaurus, perhaps we should be considering
> renorming it into separate sub-vocabularies. This will clarify the
> missing pieces (e.g., GRBs) needed for pragmatic transient reporting
> and classification.

This sounds like a good idea. Could you create a subset of the skos/rdf file that covers just voevent terminology? Then we could work on ensuring that we have what we need for that.

Ed Received on 2007-10-09Z23:24:09