W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > December 2001

Re: WebOnt General Requirements Subgroup - Initial E-mail

From: Deborah McGuinness <dlm@ksl.stanford.edu>
Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2001 10:04:04 -0800
Message-ID: <3C13A793.80116C87@ksl.stanford.edu>
To: Jeff Heflin <heflin@cse.lehigh.edu>
CC: ned.smith@intel.com, jeremy_carroll@hp.com, phayes@ai.uwf.edu, connolly@w3.org, jos.deroo.jd@belgium.agfa.com, herman.ter.horst@philips.com, hendler@cs.umd.edu, www-archive@w3.org
ps. sorry for multiple messages - i think what becomes a little tricky is the notion that we are
talking about language requirements.
i dont know that any of the topics on the original list:
 versioning
- ontology-based search
- domain-mapping/ ontology linking
- ontology querying
- rapid creation of large ontologies
- inconsistency/contradiction (added as a result of mailing list
discussion)

are truly language requiements but they are what naturally develops as needs once one tries to use
the language.
note also that the "original list" of mapping and linking i would claim goes in the same point as
my difference and merging (along with keeping track of mapping information)

d

Jeff Heflin wrote:

> Actually, I agree that scalability is a requirement for web ontology
> langauge, I just didn't make it very clear in my previous message. What
> I was trying to say was that from your requirement #1, I thought
> scalability was the only one with impact on the language, while the
> other three topics (reliability, availability, and performance) were
> more system oriented. In fact, I believe we should make scalability one
> of our requirements (of course with the realization that some
> requirements may be in conflict with each other and we will have to
> strike some balances in the eventual language).
>
> If you don't mind, I'd like to ask for some clarification on how you
> think some of the remaining points carry over. In particular, could you
> explain how you would describe
>
> - security management
> - multi-user collaboration
> - difference and merging
>
> in terms of language requirements? Thanks!
>
> Jeff
>
> Deborah McGuinness wrote:
> >
> > agreed that there was a slightly different slant to that paper but i think at least most
> > (which you pointed out) and actually I would claim all of the points still carry over.
> > you mention not scalability for a web ontology language.  i would dispute this - i think if
> > the language can not scale, then we can not use it for representation on the web.   the thing
> > i would agree with is that scalability is not a thrust of our work and is almost "motherhood
> > and apple-pie" for any language  thus not worth making an issue of.
> >
> > i would add conceptual search to my list.
> >
> > d
> >
> > Jeff Heflin wrote:
> >
> > > Deborah,
> > >
> > > Thanks for the requirements. However, they raise an interesting
> > > question. It appears that your requirements were specifically designed
> > > for an ontology management system, but I believe we were charged to
> > > develop requirements for a web ontology language. Clearly, there is some
> > > overlap, but if our mission is the later, then perhaps not all of your
> > > requirements apply. For example, I believe the following requirements
> > > are too system-oriented:
> > >
> > > 1) reliability, availability and performance (but not scalability!)
> > > 4) security management
> > > 5) multi-user collaboration (I'm not sure how language design can impact
> > > this, except for at the interoperability level)
> > > 6) difference and merging
> > >
> > > I think the following can be cast (perhaps with a little rewriting) as
> > > language requirements:
> > > 1) scalability (but not reliability, availability, or performance)
> > > 2) ease of use (user-friendly)
> > > 3) extensible and flexible knowledge rep.
> > > 7) XML interfaces (perhaps rename as XML syntax?)
> > > 8) internationalization
> > > 9) versioning
> > >
> > > Note that 1,2, and 9 are similar to requirements I mentioned in my
> > > document.
> > >
> > > Of course, I'd like to hear the opinions of the rest of the group before
> > > we proceed with merging the two sets of requirements that we have.
> > >
> > > Jeff
> > >

--
 Deborah L. McGuinness
 Knowledge Systems Laboratory
 Gates Computer Science Building, 2A Room 241
 Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305-9020
 email: dlm@ksl.stanford.edu
 URL: http://ksl.stanford.edu/people/dlm
 (voice) 650 723 9770    (stanford fax) 650 725 5850   (computer fax)  801 705 0941
Received on Sunday, 9 December 2001 13:00:28 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 7 November 2012 14:17:15 GMT