Two questions below, which I probably should have sent in different emails.
Doug
Rick's IVOA thesaurus (as do the vocabs from Explicator) includes entries like
<skos:Concept rdf:about="#accretionDisks">
<skos:prefLabel>accretion disks</skos:prefLabel>
<skos:definition>accretion discs UK</skos:definition>
<skos:definition>accretion disks</skos:definition>
...
I think it would be good to add xml:lang attributes, so in this case we'd have
<skos:prefLabel xml:lang="en">accretion disks</skos:prefLabel>
<skos:definition xml:lang="en-GB">accretion discs</skos:definition>
<skos:definition xml:lang="en">accretion disks</skos:definition>
Or, if I actually read http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-i18n-bp/ then we'd have
<rdf:RDF .... xml:lang="en">
...
<skos:prefLabel>accretion disks</skos:prefLabel>
<skos:definition xml:lang="en-GB">accretion discs</skos:definition>
<skos:definition>accretion disks</skos:definition>
Is there any reason why we shouldn't add this to the vocabs?
b) what skos:*Note should be used?
Rick's IVOA thesaurus uses skos:scopeNote for adding "extra"
information. The skos guide at
http://www.w3.org/TR/swbp-skos-core-guide/#secdocumentation suggests we
should split this up and use one of
skos:scopeNote skos:historyNote skos:editorialNote skos:changeNote
I can go through and produce a first draft for this (ie how I feel the labels should be placed) if that would be useful. Received on 2007-11-26Z16:15:54