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

Re: Use case categories - 1st cut (action due by Thurs)

From: Jeff Heflin <heflin@cse.lehigh.edu>
Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 16:38:13 -0500
Message-ID: <3C0E93C5.A10015F6@cse.lehigh.edu>
To: hendler@cs.umd.edu
CC: webont <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
I think we can divide the use cases into three classes:

1) Web services
2) Information management (this includes archives, catalogs, large data
sets, etc.)
3) Content interoperability

Note that I left out Jim's fourth category adapation of content to
user/device. I think that this is really just a form of dealing with
content interoperability. As I see it, the content exists in some form
(ontology), and needs to be translated to another form (ontology) for
use by a different user or device. Thus this is about the
interoperability of content.

Real time/sensors (the remainder of Jim's fourth category) seems to me
to be closely related to web services. For example, Ned Smith described
a use case in which a sensor is embedded in a network and interacts with
other devices in the network. I think this is analagous to agents using
and providing services to other agents. Sensors may also fit under
content interoperability, particularly if you're dealing with sensors
that have different ontologies.

Conceptual open-hypermedia seems to me to fit best under my information
managment category. From what I understand in Nick Gibbins' recent
message, it is a technique for locating information in large data
sources.

Finally, I think that condradiction/inconsistencies is really a
requirement of content interoperability, and not a use case in its own
right. When we integrate heterogeneous content, then we need a means for
detecting and resolving inconsistencies.

Any comments/thoughts?

Jeff Heflin
Lehigh University


Jim Hendler wrote:
> 
> WOW-Gers
> 
>   I have taken a stab at a categorization of the use cases - I find 3
> natural categories, 1 almost a natural category (two ideas that might
> be related, but don't fit totally) and only a couple of loose ends I
> could not figure out exactly where to fit.  In addition, some
> technical issues that might cross cut seem to come out.  There are
> listed below.
>   I would be happy if we could end up with 4 total groups -- winnowing
> my 4 categories down to 3, and developing the "cross cutting
> technologies" to become more focused (to be the base for the sort of
> "requirements" Peter Patel-Schneider argued for earlier)
> 
>   Please discuss and let's see if we can resolve by Thurs.
>    Jim H
> 
> ==========
> [Note WOL is only an acronym for Web Ontology Language at this point-
> does not represent commitment to this name]
> 
> Use cases - rough categorization proposal:
> 
> 1) Web Services
> WSDL is only a starting place, seems to stress interconnection, but
> not content.  WOL has potential to be used for better advertising
> (via hierarchy/classification), for connecting advertisements to
> ontologies, and for exploring the compositionality of services.
> 
> 2) Archives/CatalogsLarge data (or image) sets/web site management
> All of these areas focus on the use of ontologies in the management
> of large scale information sources.  Includes need for matching,
> classification, default reasoning.  "Traditional" metadata (i.e.
> document markup) would fall in this category.
> 
> 3) Content Interoperability (a/k/a/ agent markup)
> RDF has advantage over XML in allowing easy merging of content found
> on different sites/resources, and the use of the combined sources.
> Use cases include linking of databases (DB schemas), coupling data to
> pages, linking instance data to ontologies.  Also allows linking of
> ontology to ontology for mapping of vocabulary, etc.
> 
> 4) Adaptation of content to user/device (real time/sensors?)
> Use of ontologies to help determine what info to show to whom when,
> or to be the information shown (i.e.  in PalmDAML the user can browse
> the semantics separate from the source pages).  The real-time and
> embedded sensor area seems to fit in best here - but I admit I'm
> pushing a little.
> 
> Loose ends:
>   open hypermedia
>   contradiction/inconsistencies
> 
> Technical issues that could be address in some or all
>   versioning
>   ontology-based search
>   domain-mapping/ontology linking (how much is commited to by a link)
>   ontology querying
>   rapid creation of large ontologies ?
> 
> --
> Professor James Hendler                           hendler@cs.umd.edu
> Director, Semantic Web and Agent Technologies     301-405-2696
> Maryland Information and Network Dynamics Lab.    301-405-6707 (Fax)
> AV Williams Building, Univ of Maryland            College Park, MD 20742
> http://www.cs.umd.edu/users/hendler
Received on Wednesday, 5 December 2001 16:38:21 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:57:46 GMT