W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > July 2005

RE: [VM] Configuration management for RDFS/OWL ontologies

From: Miles, AJ \(Alistair\) <A.J.Miles@rl.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2005 16:56:40 +0100
Message-ID: <F5839D944C66C049BDB45F4C1E3DF89DEE9E53@exchange31.fed.cclrc.ac.uk>
To: "David Price" <david.price@eurostep.com>, <public-swbp-wg@w3.org>, <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>

I'd be happy to rename it to 'change management'.  I was using 'configuration management' as defined in Prince2 project management standard, but am aware that the term is rather overloaded.

Cheers,

Al.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-swbp-wg-request@w3.org
> [mailto:public-swbp-wg-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of David Price
> Sent: 07 July 2005 14:00
> To: public-swbp-wg@w3.org; www-rdf-interest@w3.org
> Subject: RE: [VM] Configuration management for RDFS/OWL ontologies
> 
> 
> 
> All,
> 
> It may be useful to clarify the purpose of this activity. It 
> seems that
> Change Management is actually what this paper discusses. Configuration
> Management in the engineering industry is a broader concept. 
> Configuration
> Management is also used to describe things like the ability 
> to produce an
> automobile based on a set of options and logic about acceptable
> configurations (e.g. a larger battery is required when the car has an
> electric motor to raise the convertible top).
> 
> David
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org
> [mailto:www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Miles, 
> AJ (Alistair)
> Sent: 07 July 2005 13:36
> To: Thomas Baker
> Cc: public-swbp-wg@w3.org; www-rdf-interest@w3.org
> Subject: RE: [VM] Configuration management for RDFS/OWL ontologies
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps a slightly confusing name, but in a project management (e.g.
> prince2) context 'configuration management' means a system 
> for controlling
> change to ensure quality, and that's what we need for RDF 
> vocabs.  I.e. we
> need to know how to support *commercial strength* RDF vocab 
> and ontology
> development.
> 
> If you've got 'The Little Prince2' look at section 6.1.1 
> 'Planning Quality'
> ... very useful, tho I better not reproduce it here for fear 
> of copyright
> infringement.  It highlights 5 processes:  
> 
> Planning: this is what we did when we discussed the policy statements
> section of the SKOS Core spec - we decided what level of configuration
> management is required, and we wrote a process for achieving it.
> 
> Identification: this means identifying all the components of 
> a product.  In
> the case of SKOS Core this is all the properties and classes, 
> in the case of
> a generic RDF vocab it could be modules as well.
> 
> Control: this means 'freezing' products and making changes 
> only within a
> formal (or at least clearly defined) procedure, involving e.g. access
> rights, version tracking.  For SKOS Core this is editorial 
> responsibility,
> historical snapshots, and the review process.
> 
> Status accounting: this means keeping a record of current and 
> historical
> data for a product, especially relating to the status of the 
> product.  For
> SKOS Core this is per-term stability levels. 
> 
> Verification: verifying that actual status matches recorded/authorised
> status.  We could do that e.g. by checking if changes have 
> occurred to a
> class or prop between versions that are not allowed by the 
> term's stability
> level.
> 
> An analogy is e.g. car or aerospace engineering.  With good 
> configuration
> management you can track a problem back to the specific batch 
> of faulty nuts
> or bolts.  With poor configuration management you have no 
> idea what went
> wrong or how to fix it. 
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Al.
> 
> [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Configuration_management
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Thomas Baker [mailto:tbaker@tbaker.de]
> > Sent: 07 July 2005 13:03
> > To: Miles, AJ (Alistair)
> > Cc: public-swbp-wg@w3.org; www-rdf-interest@w3.org
> > Subject: Re: [VM] Configuration management for RDFS/OWL ontologies
> > 
> > 
> > On Wed, Jul 06, 2005 at 02:51:12PM +0100, Alistair Miles wrote:
> > > After the discussion on the SWBP-WG VM telecon yesterday I put
> > > down some thoughts on how configuration management for RDFS/OWL 
> > > ontologies ought to be done, see:
> > > 
> > > http://esw.w3.org/topic/ConfigurationManagement
> > > 
> > > Has anyone written anything like this down already?
> > 
> > DCMI practice for "versioning" terms is described
> > -- unofficially, from a DCMI perspective -- in 
> > ftp://ftp.cenorm.be/public/ws-mmi-dc/mmidc148.pdf.
> > 
> > I'm curious about the choice of words "configuration 
> management".  A 
> > Google search on '"configuration management" site:w3.org'
> > does not show any obvious sources for a definition in the 
> W3C context.
> > 
> > Tom
> > 
> > -- 
> > Dr. Thomas Baker                      baker@sub.uni-goettingen.de
> > SUB - Goettingen State                            +49-551-39-3883
> > and University Library                           +49-30-8109-9027
> > Papendiek 14, 37073 Göttingen
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> 
Received on Friday, 8 July 2005 15:56:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:52:14 GMT