Matches in LOV for { ?s ?p ISO CompoundEquivalence \n\niso-thes:plusUseTerm (and its inverse iso-thes:plusUFTerm) may be derived from iso-thes:CompoundEquivalence.\n\nFor a iso-thes:CompoundEquivalence instance each derived iso thes:plusUseTerm has as:\n- subject: the iso thes:plusUF value\n- object: the iso thes:plusUse value\n\nAn ISO 25964 compliant thesaurus only has one compound equivalence relation for each split non preferred term.\n\nIn special cases where the iso-thes:SplitNonPreferredTerm has more than one decomposition, the inverse inference may not be possible. (While this situation should not arise within a single thesaurus that complies with ISO 25964, it could occur if terms and relationships have been drawn from more than one thesaurus. For this reason the property skos:inScheme (http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#inScheme) should be used with each instance of the class Compound Equivalence, to relate it to its Thesaurus.). }
Showing items 1 to 1 of
1
with 100 items per page.
- CompoundEquivalence comment "ISO CompoundEquivalence \n\niso-thes:plusUseTerm (and its inverse iso-thes:plusUFTerm) may be derived from iso-thes:CompoundEquivalence.\n\nFor a iso-thes:CompoundEquivalence instance each derived iso thes:plusUseTerm has as:\n- subject: the iso thes:plusUF value\n- object: the iso thes:plusUse value\n\nAn ISO 25964 compliant thesaurus only has one compound equivalence relation for each split non preferred term.\n\nIn special cases where the iso-thes:SplitNonPreferredTerm has more than one decomposition, the inverse inference may not be possible. (While this situation should not arise within a single thesaurus that complies with ISO 25964, it could occur if terms and relationships have been drawn from more than one thesaurus. For this reason the property skos:inScheme (http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#inScheme) should be used with each instance of the class Compound Equivalence, to relate it to its Thesaurus.)".