W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-webont-wg@w3.org > January 2003

Re: Action: Review of satisfaction of requirements

From: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.umd.edu>
Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2003 10:08:52 -0500
Message-Id: <p05200f58ba3a065e8844@[10.0.1.3]>
To: Jeff Heflin <heflin@cse.lehigh.edu>, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Cc: WebOnt <www-webont-wg@w3.org>

At 9:41 -0500 1/2/03, Jeff Heflin wrote:
>The precise wording of the requirement is:
>
>R5. Ontology metadata
>It must be possible to provide meta-data for each ontology, such as
>author, publish-date, etc. The language should provide a standard set of
>common metadata properties. These properties may or may not be borrowed
>from the Dublin Core element set.
>
>The reason I say it is not satisfied is the second sentence: "The
>language should provide a STANDARD SET ..." As it stands, OWL does not
>provide a standard set, but people can use the Dublin Core if they
>desire. The difference between this and R19 and R20 is that OWL builds
>on top of XML. OWL does not build on top of the Dublin Core, but instead
>by building on RDF has the ability to reuse it.
>
>I think we could say we met the requirement if we simply removed the
>second sentence. That is, change it to:
>
>R5. Ontology metadata
>It must be possible to provide meta-data for each ontology, such as
>author, publish-date, etc. These properties may or may not be borrowed
>from the Dublin Core element set.
>
>Would this be satisfactory?
>
>Jeff

this sounds like a good change and completely in keeping with what 
was intended.
>
>Dan Connolly wrote:
>>
>>  On Mon, 2002-12-30 at 14:57, Jeff Heflin wrote:
>>  > I have reviewed the requirements from the Req Doc [1] with respect to
>>  > our current language. Most of the requirements are definitely satisfied,
>>  > however there is one that isn't and two that probably are (but I'd like
>>  > a second opinion).
>>  >
>>  > R5. Ontology metadata is not satisfied.
>>
>>  No?
>>
>>  >  It essentially requires specific
>>  > meta-data properties such as author, publish date, etc.
>>
>>  Which are already available in the dublin core.
>>  We satisfied R5 by integrating OWL into
>>  the Resource Description Framework in such a way
>>  that we get these properties for free.
>>
>>  >  I would have no
>>  > problem demoting this to an objective if the WG agrees.
>>
>>  No, I don't agree.
>>
>>  > The two probably supported are:
>>  >
>>  > R19. Supporting a character model
>>  >
>>  > and
>>  >
>>  > R20. Supporting a uniqueness of Unicode strings
>>  >
>>  > I think we get these for free with XML,
>>
>>  likewise we get R5 for free with RDF (and dublin core).
>>
>>  >  but would like to make sure we
>>  > didn't have something else in mind when we added them. If you feel they
>>  > are not currently supported, please let me know.
>>  >
>>  > Jeff
>>  >
>>  > [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/webont-req
>>  --
>>  Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/


-- 
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)
Univ of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742	  240-731-3822 (Cell)
http://www.cs.umd.edu/users/hendler
Received on Thursday, 2 January 2003 10:09:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:57:56 GMT