W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webont-wg@w3.org > February 2002

Re: Lexical representations

From: Nick Gibbins <nmg@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2002 10:16:47 +0000
Message-ID: <15478.6799.704433.743577@localhost.localdomain>
To: www-webont-wg@w3.org

Leo Obrst <lobrst@mitre.org> writes:

> Jeremy's new rendition is much better. However, the conflation with
> URIs is not. Every ontology needs "display names", for many
> reasons. We had ample support of this in the content
> interoperability use cases. And these "lexical representation" names
> are only the beginning, and apply in a limited (but very important
> context). Why not tie this in to the "tags" we already need? I.e.,
> "true" metadata about objects.

I'd be against this. The association of human-readable labels with
ontology terms is a different task to the attachment of provenance to
statements, and should be represented in this doc by a separate
requirement (not least because it seems likely that they will be
supported by different mechanisms in the final language).

Nick Gibbins                                            nmg@ecs.soton.ac.uk
IAM (Intelligence, Agents, Multimedia)             tel: +44 (0) 23 80592831
Electronics and Computer Science                   fax: +44 (0) 23 80592865
University of Southampton
Received on Friday, 22 February 2002 05:16:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:56:42 UTC