- From: Michael Schneider <schneid@fzi.de>
- Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2007 09:29:34 +0200
- To: "Emanuele D'Arrigo" <manu3d@gmail.com>
- Cc: "OWL developers public list" <public-owl-dev@w3.org>
A correction! I wrote: > Emanuele D'Arrigo wrote: > >>Should all these axioms be stored in the ontology >>so that whatever application manipulates the instances >>can make use of them directly? Or should they be >>instances themselves, of a separate "permission" >>ontology somehow applied to the ontology "files"? >>Or are there other options? > >If you decide for the AnnotationProperty method, I would >prefer to put these >metadata annotations directly into the ontology. This was *not* the best advice! I have missed a few significant points yesterday night: 1) Access rights, like which user or group is allowed to manipulate which class or property, should better be kept separate from the ontology itself. Then these access rights can be updated, while the ontology itself keeps untouched. 2) An access rights vocabulary is of general interest, not only to the specific "File" ontology. Hence, it should be separate from such a domain specific ontology. One could then build support into ontology editors for generically handling access rights to arbitrary entities in arbitrary ontologies. So my new recommendation would be the following: A) Create an ontology <fileont>, which contains the 'file' class, and the 'size' and 'name' properties. B) Create an ontology <accessont>, which defines the AnnotationPropertyS discussed in my last post, like 'isEditable' and 'allowedUser'. C) Build an ontology <myfileaccess>, wherein you define the concrete access rights, like that the property 'name' may only be edited by the users U1 and U2. This ontology should /import/ the two other ontologies, so put in the following ontology header: <myfileaccess> a owl:Ontology ; owl:imports <fileont> ; owl:imports <accessont> . Now, if you load the ontology <myfileaccess> into some ontology editor, the editor will also read in the <fileont> and the <accessont> ontologies, and it will merge all three ontologies into a single one. So you will still have the same /view/ as if you had all information been stored in the same ontology, but the new approach with three separate ontologies is much more flexible. Cheers, Michael -- Dipl.-Inform. Michael Schneider FZI Forschungszentrum Informatik Karlsruhe Abtl. Information Process Engineering (IPE) Tel : +49-721-9654-726 Fax : +49-721-9654-727 Email: Michael.Schneider@fzi.de Web : http://www.fzi.de/ipe/eng/mitarbeiter.php?id=555 FZI Forschungszentrum Informatik an der Universität Karlsruhe Haid-und-Neu-Str. 10-14, D-76131 Karlsruhe Tel.: +49-721-9654-0, Fax: +49-721-9654-959 Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts Az: 14-0563.1 Regierungspräsidium Karlsruhe Vorstand: Rüdiger Dillmann, Michael Flor, Jivka Ovtcharova, Rudi Studer Vorsitzender des Kuratoriums: Ministerialdirigent Günther Leßnerkraus
Received on Friday, 28 September 2007 07:29:48 UTC