SKOS best practice rules

[sroertgen]

@nichtich I found this document from qSKOS regarding quality issues: https://github.com/cmader/qSKOS/wiki/Quality-Issues#Ambiguous_Notation_References

Are you aware of any other best practice recommendation regarding SKOS?

Otherwise I would maybe go with this for implementing a best-practice shape

CC @acka47 @osma @wetneb

[osma]

I published this paper on SKOS quality together with Christian Mader, the author of qSKOS. It's around ten years old but I think the list of and discussion around quality aspects of SKOS still stands:

Suominen, O., Mader, C. Assessing and Improving the Quality of SKOS Vocabularies. J Data Semant 3, 47–73 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13740-013-0026-0

If you can't access the original (paywalled) version, a freely available preprint has essentially the same content.

[dalito]

There is also a vocabulary profile developed since some years in Australia's open data landscape which we have adapted for voc4cat (vocabulary) / voc4cat-tool (toolchain).

[acka47]

There is also a vocabulary profile developed since some years in Australia's open data landscape which we have adapted for voc4cat (vocabulary) / voc4cat-tool (toolchain).

Thanks for this information, @dalito ! At least I wasn't aware of this SKOS profile. We'll have a look at it and at the corresponding GitHub repo: https://github.com/AGLDWG/vocpub-profile/