W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-awwsw@w3.org > April 2008

RE: homework assignment as interpreted by JAR

From: Williams, Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol) <skw@hp.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2008 12:58:17 +0000
To: Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>, "public-awwsw@w3.org" <public-awwsw@w3.org>
Message-ID: <9674EA156DA93A4F855379AABDA4A5C611CE76EBF2@G5W0277.americas.hpqcorp.net>
A diagram with a bit more detail... (anonymous superclasses though some may be redundant).

Stuart
--
Hewlett-Packard Limited registered Office: Cain Road, Bracknell, Berks RG12 1HN
Registered No: 690597 England

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-awwsw-request@w3.org
> [mailto:public-awwsw-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Williams,
> Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol)
> Sent: 15 April 2008 13:44
> To: Jonathan Rees; public-awwsw@w3.org
> Subject: RE: homework assignment as interpreted by JAR
>
> FWIW... attached a Topbraid composer diagram produced from
> the ontology.
>
> Jonathan, you may cover it on the call, but I would be
> interested in an articulation of the internal inconsistencies
> in the Taylor/Fielding paper.
>
> Thx,
>
> Stuart
> --
> Hewlett-Packard Limited registered Office: Cain Road,
> Bracknell, Berks RG12 1HN Registered No: 690597 England
>
>
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: public-awwsw-request@w3.org
> > [mailto:public-awwsw-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Rees
> > Sent: 14 April 2008 04:57
> > To: public-awwsw@w3.org
> > Subject: homework assignment as interpreted by JAR
> >
> >
> > As promised I've prepared a little ontology that is my attempt to
> > continue where Stuart left off - to establish a framework that lets
> > you make statements about the nonarbitrariness of
> resources, such as
> > the idea that if at time t there are extant two
> representations R1 in
> > French and R2 in Spanish, and R1 is a favorable review of movie M,
> > then R2 should not be a bad review of movie M. In order to
> do this I
> > had to come up with a theory of information resources. I've
> tried to
> > be as faithful as possible to Fielding and Taylor's ICSE
> paper, which
> > is hard because it's not internally consistent, with AWWW, which is
> > hard because I don't understand the definitions it gives, and with
> > various statements I've heard from Tim.
> >
> > The ontology (written in OWL and rendered in RDF/XML) is here:
> >
> > http://purl.org/NET/inforesource
> >
> > To read it you could use triplr or cwm to convert it to
> turtle, but a
> > better bet is to view it in some ontology viewer such as Protege; I
> > used Protege 4. Yes, ideally there would be a nice readable turtle
> > version, but the technology I'm using isn't quite there yet.
> >
> > There's a not very pretty omnigraffle diagram of the approach at
> >
> > http://sw.neurocommons.org/2008/inforesource.png
> >
> > which I will not take the time to prettify now (I don't
> know why the
> > background is gray)
> >
> >
> >
>


Inforesource.jpg
(image/jpeg attachment: Inforesource.jpg)

Received on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 13:02:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 July 2008 07:55:27 GMT