On Thu, 5 Feb 2015 11:17:58 -0500
Bob Morris <morris.bob@gmail.com> wrote:
> But  skos:note and its subproperties (including skos:example) can take
> literals or references [1].  To me, that weighs   more than the
> baggage of minting two new terms.

Also, SKOS, unless care is taken to import the Owl-DL version, brings
you into Owl-Full, with undesirable consequences for those who wish to
do reasoning.  In early versions of dwcFP, we did include SKOS terms,
but removed them because of the consequences for reasoning.

SKOS has some nice terms, reuse is a nice idea, but it comes with
significant knowledge engineering consequences.

-Paul
--
Paul J. Morris
Biodiversity Informatics Manager
Harvard University Herbaria/Museum of Comparative Zoölogy
mole@morris.net  AA3SD  PGP public key available

_______________________________________________
tdwg-content mailing list
tdwg-content@lists.tdwg.org
http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-content