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

Re: Guide: draft of Oct 31

From: Mike Dean <mdean@bbn.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2002 18:19:37 -0500
Message-Id: <200210312319.SAA15071@cam-mbx1.bbn.com>
To: "Smith, Michael K" <michael.smith@eds.com>
cc: webont <www-webont-wg@w3.org>

> I should have include the wine and food ontology files, for
> those of you who are curious.  They are attached.

Thanks for sending these out.  Here are few quick comments:

1) The owl namespace should be http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl

2) Remove .owl from the !ENTITY declarations.  This allows
use of content negotiation based on MIME types.

3) Several of us regret not providing examples of instances
(content) separate from ontologies in the DAML+OIL examples.
If this were really deployed, I'd expect some authority to
publish the wine ontology, each vineyard or distributor to
publish its products as instances using this ontology, and
each restaurant to link to these instances as part of its
menu.  I'd suggest the following

  rename wine.owl to wine-ont.owl

  rename food.owl to food-ont.owl

  move each Winery and its associated instances from
  wine.owl into a separate file (or just do this for a
  couple and then put the rest in other-wines.owl)

  create chez-deb.owl containing a wine list and/or menu for
  a notional restaurant

4) I think the synonym owl:hasClassAs declarations (e.g.
food:Red owl:sameClassAs vin:Red) set a bad example (we just
removed such constructs from OWL itself).  food.owl should
just reference vin:Red directly.  Maybe we could have
dennys:Beverage sameClassAs food:PotableLiquid instead?

Thanks!

	Mike
Received on Thursday, 31 October 2002 18:20:08 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:57:53 GMT