- From: Catherine Dolbear <Catherine.Dolbear@ordnancesurvey.co.uk>
- Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2006 14:36:29 -0000
- To: <public-owl-dev@w3.org>
Hi Anne, Your proposal for a Sydney Syntax looks really interesting, and we'd be interested in participating in this work. From reading the threads on your original mail, it looks like the consensus is to develop something from OWL backwards to structured natural language, as that's an easier problem than using natural language to author OWL-DL. We have been working on the latter problem, developing a structured English (which we're calling Rabbit), along with a GUI that steps the domain expert through the stages of ontology authoring and writing structured sentences. So I have some questions: - What exactly are you going to do with this structured English syntax? I'm guessing it'll be far too DL-like for real domain experts to use for production (based on our experiences with teaching domain experts to author ontologies). So is it to help them understand the OWL that DL-ontologists have written? (useful in itself) or to help document the OWL "code"? [we currently put all our structured English sentences into the rdf:comment annotation as documentation; OWL 1.1 will mean we can document each axiom individually, which will be nice] - Is the structured English that you're proposing a stepping stone to addressing the harder problem of helping the domain expert to author ontologies? I doubt it, because it'll be very constrained by what OWL can state, rather than what domain experts actually want to say. Anyway, we're planning to do some user testing of Rabbit, in terms of domain expert understanding and (un)ambiguous interpretation, and we could include the Sydney syntax in the experiments as a comparison if you'd like. Cathy Dr Cathy Dolbear Ordnance Survey Research Labs Southampton, United Kingdom. . This email is only intended for the person to whom it is addressed and may contain confidential information. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this email which must not be copied, distributed or disclosed to any other person. Unless stated otherwise, the contents of this email are personal to the writer and do not represent the official view of Ordnance Survey. Nor can any contract be formed on Ordnance Survey's behalf via email. We reserve the right to monitor emails and attachments without prior notice. Thank you for your cooperation. Ordnance Survey Romsey Road Southampton SO16 4GU Tel: 08456 050505 http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk
Received on Saturday, 2 December 2006 01:50:38 UTC