W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-swbp-wg@w3.org > January 2006

reuse of part-whole ontology in WSDL RDF mapping

From: Jacek Kopecky <jacek.kopecky@deri.org>
Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 01:37:45 +0100
To: Alan Rector <Alan.Rector@manchester.ac.uk>
Cc: public-swbp-wg@w3.org, rector@cs.man.ac.uk, welty@us.ibm.com
Message-Id: <1137803865.3737.22.camel@localhost>

Alan, thanks for the info, I'm glad the part-whole ontology might move
on. I expect we will reuse it in some way in the WSDL RDF mapping, so
you can count on us for a review as well. 8-)

Can you please give me an estimate of the timing for this ontology? What
is the target status for the ontology? And especially, if we move the
WSDL RDF mapping to last call around the W3C TP in March, do you expect
the part-whole ontology to keep at most a step behind us, so that we can
reuse it without slowing down our already delayed deliverable? 8-)

And I have a guidance question as well:

We have currently a set of classes (e.g. Description, Interface,
Binding) and a set of properties (e.g. interface, binding) that are used
both for pointing from Description to its parts Interface and Binding,
but the "interface" property is also used to point from binding to the
corresponding interface (where there is no part-of relationship). So our
hierarchy is Description at the top which contains Interfaces and
Bindings (among others), and Bindings point to Interfaces (one each) as
well.

In order for us to reuse the part-whole ontology, the links between
Description and the lower level of Interface and Binding must indicate
the is_part_of_directly relationship. I can see 3 different ways in
which we can do this:

     1. when mapping from WSDL (XML) to RDF, we will generate both
        "interface" and "is_part_of_directly" between Description and
        Interface (and similar pairs of statements for the other part-of
        relationships)
     2. in places where a part-of relationship happens, we will replace
        the current named properties with is_part_of_directly, and we
        will keep our named properties (e.g. interface) to point from
        Binding to Interface
     3. we will split "interface" (and the same way for similar
        properties) into two properties - "contains_interface" and
        "interface", the first being subproperty of is_part_of_directly,
        the second used where "interface" is used currently but without
        the part-of meaning

I hope this makes sense. Personally, I don't like either of the options
- the first one shows no relationship between "interface" and
"is_part_of_directly"; the second makes any query for all Interfaces go
one level deeper (to the type of the object of is_part_of_directly), and
the third introduces the two properties, both of which should really be
a single "interface".

Do you have any comments on which approach might be preferable or if 
I indeed missed something better?

Best regards,

Jacek

On Fri, 2006-01-20 at 10:04 +0000, Alan Rector wrote:
> Jacek
> 
> As far as I know the note is ready to go modulo a few minor tweaks.   
> I think Chris Welty 'has the token'.  There was a delay when his  
> machine failed at the Face-to-Face in November, and I suspect  
> holidays and other things have meant the document hasn't emerged.
> 
> If there is a problem for Chris, I can probably make the few  
> necessary changes next month, but he had some alternative examples in  
> mind.
> 
> No changes in substance are planned.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Alan
> 
> On 18 Jan 2006, at 19:20, Jacek Kopecky wrote:
> 
> > Dear SWBP WG, 8-)
> >
> > within WS-Description WG we are working on an RDF mapping for the WSDL
> > components, and we are considering using your Part-whole ontology [1].
> > Can you please let me know about the current status of this particular
> > ontology and your plans for it?
> >
> > We will possibly want to go to Last Call with the RDF mapping  
> > around the
> > Tech Plenary in March, so if the part-whole ontology is planned to be
> > delivered significantly later (if, indeed, ever), we would not be able
> > to reuse it.
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Jacek Kopecky
> >
> > [1] http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~rector/swbp/simple-part-whole/simple- 
> > part-whole-relations-v0-2.html
> >
> 
> -----------------------
> Alan Rector
> Professor of Medical Informatics
> Department of Computer Science
> University of Manchester
> Manchester M13 9PL, UK
> TEL +44 (0) 161 275 6188/6149
> FAX +44 (0) 161 275 6204
> www.cs.man.ac.uk/mig
> www.clinical-esciences.org
> www.co-ode.org
> 
Received on Saturday, 21 January 2006 00:37:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:09:46 UTC