Ontologies, or more generally speaking, Knowledge Organization Systems (KOS) have been developed to support the correct interpretation of shared data in collaborative applications. The quantity and the heterogeneity of domain knowledge often require several KOS to describe their content. In order to assure unambiguous interpretation, overlapped concepts of different, but domain-related KOS are semantically connected via mappings. However, in various domains, KOS periodically evolve creating the necessity of reviewing the validity of associated mappings. The size of KOS remains a barrier for a manual review of mappings, and rather requires the support of (semi-) automatic solutions. This article describes our experiences in understanding how KOS evolution affects mappings. We present our lessons learned from various empirical experiments, and we derive primary elements and requirements for improving the automation of mapping maintenance.