W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xg-lld@w3.org > September 2011

Guide of construction of ontologies (was: Re: "Namespace" = "vocabulary with URIs"?)

From: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
Date: Tue, 06 Sep 2011 13:24:25 +0200
Message-ID: <4E6602E9.2020400@few.vu.nl>
To: public-xg-lld@w3.org

>>>>>> --  Removed reference to "Good practice guidelines and recipes for constructing
>>>>>>     ontologies and structured vocabularies." -- out of place here.
>>>> Not sure it's irrelevant : best practices would be needed when we're
>>>> talking about providing URIs for a vocabulary which wasn't primarily
>>>> designed for the Semantic Web (e.g. RDA)
>>> I do not think the point it irrelevant; it just seems out of place in a
>>> paragraph that focuses on managing RDF vocabularies and URIs.  Maybe it could
>>> be turned into a full sentence and added to the end of the point on "Develop
>>> library data standards that are compatible with Linked Data" [2].
>> Point taken, it would make sense.
> How about, at the end of the point on "Develop library data standrds":
>       There is a need for best-practice documentation and recipes to guide
>       participants in library-world standardization efforts in the construction of ontologies
>       and structured vocabularies.
> In context: http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/wiki/index.php?title=Draft_recommendations_page_take2&diff=6193&oldid=6191

I'm ok with that. It certainly fits this section better.
I'm not so fond of the (lack of) transition with the other sentences on data on general, but I can live with it. Especially, given the fact that this recommendation is quite trivial (it applies for any domain), I would be reluctant to put more emphasis on it...

Received on Tuesday, 6 September 2011 11:22:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:35:58 UTC