W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xg-ssn@w3.org > July 2009

Re: Comments to the ontology attributes

From: John Graybeal <graybeal@mbari.org>
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2009 06:49:47 -0700
Cc: public-xg-ssn@w3.org
Message-Id: <7E561C7B-B92D-4621-A672-DE6DF4E9DF2F@mbari.org>
To: Raúl García Castro <rgarcia@fi.upm.es>
Raúl,

These are good suggestions.

Insofar as we have made a preliminary choice as to which ontologies to  
investigate further, I am wondering if these additions need to be  
filled out for the original candidates?  I think many of the  
candidates fell short at a far lower mark, and the ones remaining will  
be evaluated at a detailed level as they are incorporated (effectively  
achieving an immediate evaluation on these points).

I would propose to include your suggestions in the template list of  
attributes (and you may feel free to add them, or I will).  We could  
also choose to add them to each individual list also if you would  
like, but I am not sure that is worth the time.  What do you think?

One thing I would like to do in any case is include them in material  
MMI [1] has for evaluating ontologies, as they seem like important  
criteria.  Please let me know if that is any problem.

John

[1] http://marinemetadata.org


On Jul 7, 2009, at 5:54 AM, Raúl García Castro wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> I have a couple of comments regarding the ontology attributes that  
> we are using to describe the ontologies:
> http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/ssn/wiki/SSN_Suggested_Key_Ontology_Intro_Attributes
>
> In the ontology attributes we already take into account some aspect  
> of the ontology quality: that the ontology is well documented.
> Nevertheless, from our experience, there are other aspects that are  
> highly relevant such as the lack of anomalies (redundancies,  
> inconsistencies, etc.) in the ontology, which are important to know  
> to decide whether to reuse some ontology or part of it.
>
> Also, regarding the reliability (trust) of the ontology, now we  
> already consider if the ontology is maintained/supported by some  
> organization and its adoption.
> In this case, other relevant factors could be if the model described  
> by the ontology is supported by some theory and if the ontology has  
> been formally evaluated.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> -- 
>
> Dr. Raúl García Castro
> http://delicias.dia.fi.upm.es/~rgarcia/
>
> Ontology Engineering Group (http://www.oeg-upm.net/)
> Universidad Politécnica de Madrid
> Campus de Montegancedo, s/n - Boadilla del Monte - 28660 Madrid
> Phone: +34 91 336 36 70 - Fax: +34 91 352 48 19
>


John

--------------
John Graybeal   <mailto:graybeal@mbari.org>  -- 831-775-1956
Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute
Marine Metadata Interoperability Project: http://marinemetadata.org
Received on Tuesday, 7 July 2009 13:50:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 7 July 2009 13:50:39 GMT