W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-swbp-wg@w3.org > November 2005

Re: [SE] Ontology Tools in the Primer Note

From: Phil Tetlow <philip.tetlow@uk.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2005 11:15:05 +0000
To: "Uschold, Michael F" <michael.f.uschold@boeing.com>
Cc: <ewallace@cme.nist.gov>, <holger@SMI.Stanford.EDU>, <public-swbp-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <OFFE7910BF.31C1C743-ON802570B2.003D8D3F-802570B2.003D9D95@uk.ibm.com>

I am obviously in agreement with Mike's position and was hoping to discuss
personally with Holger while in Galway. If we do not have the good fortune
to meet this week, I will pick up this action and contact Holger directly,
once back at work next week.

Best Regards,

Philip Tetlow
Senior Consultant (Certified Technical Architect)
IBM Business Consulting Services

Mail: IBM United Kingdom Limited, 1175 Century Way, Thorpe Park, Colton,
Leeds, LS15 8ZB
Current Assignment: DWP BPRP (Metadata)
Mobile: +44 (0)7740 923328
Email: philip.tetlow@uk.ibm.com

             "Uschold, Michael                                             
             <michael.f.uschol                                          To 
             d@boeing.com>             Phil Tetlow/UK/IBM@IBMGB,           
             Sent by:                  <ewallace@cme.nist.gov>,            
             public-swbp-wg-re         <holger@SMI.Stanford.EDU>           
             quest@w3.org                                               cc 
             06/11/2005 19:22                                      Subject 
                                       [SE] Ontology Tools in the Primer   

There was a discussion at the F2F about possible implicit endorsement of
specific ontology tools, such as protégé and semanticworks.

One solution suggested was to include screenshots of all and only open
source tools that get reasonable use (I.e. Protégé and Swoop). Commercial
tools can be mentioned with references.

It occurs to me that this whole issse is very much a side issue for this
note. It is not a note about ontology tools, so it is not important to try
and give any comprehensive coverage of the area. Mention of a few tools is
sufficient to make the intended point that there are analogous tools to the
UML building tools.

Received on Monday, 7 November 2005 11:16:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:09:45 UTC