Hello!
We are in the process of rolling out some links to DBpedia over in BBC
Programmes. However, we are facing a small issue. We use our own
categorisation scheme based on SKOS, and then want to add some sameAs
links to DBpedia.
For example, we currently publish the following statements:
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 4:57 PM, Yves Raimond yves.raim...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello!
We are in the process of rolling out some links to DBpedia over in BBC
Programmes. However, we are facing a small issue. We use our own
categorisation scheme based on SKOS, and then want to add some sameAs
Is that an issue? Should we drop SKOS altogether if we go on with
that, or should we use skos:exactMatch instead of owl:sameAs?
see also http://wiki.foaf-project.org/w/term_focus
I'm running out of excuses for not having added this already...
Great, thanks for the link!
However, I'd like
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 5:09 PM, Yves Raimond yves.raim...@gmail.com wrote:
Is that an issue? Should we drop SKOS altogether if we go on with
that, or should we use skos:exactMatch instead of owl:sameAs?
see also http://wiki.foaf-project.org/w/term_focus
I'm running out of excuses for not
Is that an issue? Should we drop SKOS altogether if we go on with
that, or should we use skos:exactMatch instead of owl:sameAs?
see also http://wiki.foaf-project.org/w/term_focus
I'm running out of excuses for not having added this already...
Great, thanks for the link!
However, I'd like
Hi all
see also http://wiki.foaf-project.org/w/term_focus
However, I'd like to understand why a sameAs would be bad here, I have
the intuition it might be, but am really not sure. It looks to me like
there's no resource out there that couldn't be a SKOS concept as well
(you may want
