RE: SWAD Deliverable 8.4 - last comments before EU submission

No that's cool, I just didn't want to clog up the list if this was all out
of date...

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Miles, AJ (Alistair) [mailto:A.J.Miles@rl.ac.uk] 
> Sent: 05 February 2004 12:45
> To: 'Steve Cayzer'
> Cc: 'public-esw-thes@w3.org'
> Subject: RE: SWAD Deliverable 8.4 - last comments before EU submission
> 
> 
> 
> Hey Steve,
> 
> Hope you don't mind me forwarding this to the list, I think 
> there's some really valuable comments here, worth discussing 
> in the open.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Al.
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Steve Cayzer [mailto:steve.cayzer@hp.com]
> > Sent: 04 February 2004 21:10
> > To: Miles, AJ (Alistair)
> > Subject: Re: SWAD Deliverable 8.4 - last comments before EU 
> submission
> > 
> > > 
> > 1). any mileage in having a short glossary? I'm thinking of 
> terms like 
> > intension subsumed
> > source
> > target
> > concept
> > 
> > - or just explain briefly 'in place' - especially the first 2.
> > 
> > 2). I'm slightly surprised that when you say two concepts
> > map, you don't
> > give an ID for either concept. You say 'a hpm:concept with 
> > the prefLabel
> > 'xyz' maps to a gcl:concept with the prefLabel 'abc' '. 
> > There's nothing to
> > uniquely identify either, unless of course prefLabel is 
> > inverseFunctional,
> > which I doubt :) I suspect that this has been sorted out and 
> > agreed on the
> > thesaurus list, and that there's a good reason, but it would 
> > be nice to say
> > what that reason is.
> > 
> > 3). You say that an exact mapping can be made between two
> > concepts with
> > different labels. Why not include such a mapping in your 
> > examples for extra
> > clarity?
> > 
> > 4). b. Inexact mapping
> > replace
> > "It is recommended to use major or minor mappings instead, wherever 
> > possible." with
> > "You are recommended to use major or minor mappings 
> instead, wherever
> > possible."
> > or
> > "Use major or minor mappings instead, wherever possible."
> > 
> > 5). d. Minor
> > replace
> > "Usage: Use this property when there is some small overlap in
> > the intended
> > meaning of source and target concepts."
> > with
> > "Usage: Use this property when there is some overlap in the 
> > intended meaning
> > of source and target concepts."
> > 
> > 6). e. Partial
> > replace
> > "It is recommended that either broad or narrow mappings are
> > used instead,
> > wherever possible."
> > with
> > "You are recommended to use broad or narrow mappings 
> instead, wherever
> > possible."
> > or
> > "Use broad or narrow mappings instead, wherever possible."
> > 
> > 7). i,j,k - AND/OR/NOT
> > You can combine in arbitrary combinations (one assumes at
> > least). Could say
> > so.
> > 
> > 8). section 3
> > I don't like the use of the term 'imply' - could be
> > misleading in a logical
> > language! I'd prefer 'indicate' or 'state'.
> > My particular beef is with this statement
> > "A major mapping statement implies that the source and target 
> > sets share
> > greater than 50% of their members, a minor mapping implies 
> > less than 50% but
> > greater than 0. "
> > which I'd replace with
> > "A major mapping statement indicates that the source and target sets
> > probably share greater than 50% of their members, a minor 
> > mapping indicates
> > less than 50% but greater than 0. "
> > Similarly
> > "A broad mapping states that the target set is a superset of 
> > the source set.
> > A narrow mapping states that the target set is a subset of 
> > the source set."
> > 
> > 9). The scope notes in the RDF schema use the word 'implies',
> > this could be
> > changed to 'states' if you think it's a good idea.
> > 
> > Hope this helps
> > 
> > Steve
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Miles, AJ (Alistair) " <A.J.Miles@rl.ac.uk>
> > To: "Matthews, BM (Brian) " <B.M.Matthews@rl.ac.uk>; "Wilson,
> > MD (Michael) "
> > <M.D.Wilson@rl.ac.uk>
> > Cc: <public-esw-thes@w3.org>
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2004 1:11 PM
> > Subject: SWAD Deliverable 8.4 - last comments before EU submission
> > 
> > 
> > >
> > > http://www.w3c.rl.ac.uk/SWAD/deliverables/8.4.html
> > >
> > >
> > > Alistair Miles
> > > CCLRC - Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
> > > Building R1 Room 1.60
> > > Fermi Avenue
> > > Chilton
> > > Didcot
> > > Oxfordshire OX11 0QX
> > > United Kingdom
> > >
> > > Email:        a.j.miles@rl.ac.uk
> > > Telephone: +44 (0)1235 445440
> > >
> > >
> > 
>

Received on Thursday, 5 February 2004 07:50:51 UTC