Re: A stab at operationalizing Evan Wallace's suggestion for a new Overview

just so we are clear, my extension of Evan's suggestion was for the 
Overview document.
Note that that is different from the Guide or Reference or the other 
documents.
It is a shortish introduction.  from the overview, "This OWL Overview 
<http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/> gives a simple introduction to OWL 
by providing a language feature listing with very brief feature 
descriptions; "
so the point below that puts a link for the Guide Overview is wrong.
The Overview link  for enumeratedClass/ oneof just goes to the text at:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#oneOf

and then it provides a link into the guide.

The issue of combining reference with guide should be separated from 
evan's proposal and my expansion of an outline for
a new overview that attempts to take some of  the owl 1.0 overview 
(eliminating species discussion) with the 1.1 overview diff info.

thanks,
Deborah

Rinke Hoekstra wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> The discussion about UFD's had me look back to when I was first 
> reading the OWL 1.0 documents a few years ago. What was really 
> confusing to me, was that both the Guide and the Reference have almost 
> identical coverage of the spec, but from a differing perspective. Of 
> course, the guide adds a story line (the wines), and the reference is 
> just an iteration of all language elements. However, for both, the 
> level of detail is almost identical. Take for instance the sections on 
> enumerated classes and disjointness:
>
> OWL 1.0 Guide/Overview
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-guide-20040210/#EnumeratedClasses
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-guide-20040210/#DisjointClasses
>
> OWL 1.0 Reference
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-ref-20040210/#EnumeratedClass
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-ref-20040210/#disjointWith-def
>
> FWIW, I think the duplication was really confusing ("where did I read 
> this?"), and we should try to avoid this for 1.1 so I really vote for 
> a single 'document' that combines the two (and the new owl 1.1 
> overview). Nonetheless the difference in the way in which the language 
> is presented to the reader *is* probably relevant, something we could 
> overcome by maintaining two orthogonal tables of contents.
>
> Is there a particular reason why these should be separate real (i.e. 
> monolithic, linear) documents, and not closely interlinked 
> 'perspectives' on the same content?
>
> -Rinke
>
>
> On 7 dec 2007, at 15:41, Deborah L. McGuinness wrote:
>
>>
>> I liked Evan Wallace's suggestion yesterday for an Overview that was 
>> something in between the OWL 1.0 Overview and the OWL 1.1 member 
>> submission overview (without any species emphasis).
>> I took a stab at operationalizing that a bit with a proposed outline. 
>> I had asked some people to a short lunch meeting to discuss this 
>> suggestion. Since we did not get to discuss this proposal (as we 
>> discussed some needs and bijan's proposal to combine the overview and 
>> guide) so i thought i would send it out to the working group for 
>> comments.
>>
>> (to the people i sent this to prior to our lunch meeting, this is the 
>> same but with an intro to kr section aimed to address the concern 
>> that one needs some kr background to read the current 1.0 overview. )
>>
>> Deborah
>>
>> =================================
>>
>>
>>   Evan’s Proposal: An introductory document between OWL 1.1 Overview
>>   and OWL Overview from Rec. (without the species of OWL emphasis)
>>
>>
>>   Uli’s proposal – annotate the previous document with pointers to
>>   material
>>
>>
>>   OWL 1.0 Original Outline http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/
>>
>>  1. Introduction
>>     <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s1>
>>        1. Document Roadmap
>>           <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s1.1>
>>        2. Why OWL?
>>           <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s1.2>
>>        3. The three sublanguages of OWL
>>           <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s1.3>
>>        4. The structure of this document
>>           <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s1.4>
>>  2. Language Synopsis
>>     <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s2>
>>        1. OWL Lite Synopsis
>>           <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s2.1>
>>        2. OWL DL and OWL Full Synopsis
>>           <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s2.2>
>>  3. Language Description of OWL Lite
>>     <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s3>
>>        1. OWL Lite RDF Schema Features
>>           <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s3.1>
>>        2. OWL Lite Equality and Inequality
>>           <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s3.2>
>>        3. OWL Lite Property Characteristics
>>           <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s3.3>
>>        4. OWL Lite Property Restrictions
>>           <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s3.4>
>>        5. OWL Lite Restricted Cardinality
>>           <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s3.5>
>>        6. OWL Lite Class Intersection
>>           <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s3.6>
>>        7. OWL Datatypes
>>           <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s3.7>
>>        8. OWL Lite Header Information
>>           <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s3.8>
>>        9. OWL Lite Annotation Properties
>>           <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s3.9>
>>       10. OWL Lite Versioning
>>           <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s3.10>
>>  4. Incremental Language Description of OWL DL and OWL Full
>>     <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s4>
>>  5. Summary <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s5>
>>
>> *OWL 1.1 Member Submission Outline 
>> http://www.w3.org/Submission/owl11-overview/*
>>
>> · Overview <http://www.w3.org/Submission/owl11-overview/#1>
>>
>> · 2 Features <http://www.w3.org/Submission/owl11-overview/#2>
>>
>>   * 2.1 Syntactic Sugar 
>> <http://www.w3.org/Submission/owl11-overview/#2.1>
>>   * 2.2 /SROIQ/ <http://www.w3.org/Submission/owl11-overview/#2.2>
>>   * 2.3 Datatypes <http://www.w3.org/Submission/owl11-overview/#2.2>
>>   * 2.4 Metamodeling <http://www.w3.org/Submission/owl11-overview/#2.2>
>>
>> · References <http://www.w3.org/Submission/owl11-overview/#references>
>>
>> *Potential New Overview*
>>
>> 1 Introduction <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s1>
>>
>>        1. Document Roadmap
>>           <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s1.1>
>>        2. Intro to KR (as needed to read this doc)
>>        3. Why OWL?
>>           <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s1.2>
>>        4. New section – OWL 1.1 motivations and addition highlights
>>           (much taken from owl 1.1 overview)
>>        5. The structure of this document
>>           <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s1.4>
>>
>> 2. Language Synopsis 
>> <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s2> (note – no 
>> organization by species)
>>
>> 3. Language Description
>>
>> a. OWL RDF Schema Features 
>> <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s3.1>
>>
>> b. OWL Equality and Inequality 
>> <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s3.2>
>>
>> c. OWL Property Characteristics 
>> <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s3.3> (include 
>> new extensions local reflexivity, reflexive, irreflexive, symmetric, 
>> and antisymmetric for non-complex)
>>
>> d. OWL Property Restrictions 
>> <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s3.4> (include 
>> disjoint properties maybe property chain inclusions here)
>>
>> e. OWL Cardinality 
>> <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s3.5> (remove 
>> lite limitations, include qualified cardinality here)
>>
>> f. hasValue, one of (used to be in owl dl section)
>>
>> g. OWL Boolean operators (old intersection for lite, dl Booleans)
>>
>> h. OWL Datatypes 
>> <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s3.7> (include 
>> new owl 1.1 info here)
>>
>> i. OWL Header Information 
>> <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s3.8>
>>
>> j. OWL Annotation Properties 
>> <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s3.9>
>>
>> k. OWL Versioning 
>> <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s3.10>
>>
>> l. Syntactic sugar
>>
>> m. Metamodeling
>>
>> 4. Summary <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/#s5>
>>
>> Just a note – the 1.0 overview says “This OWL Overview 
>> <http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/> gives a simple introduction to 
>> OWL by providing a language feature listing with very brief feature 
>> descriptions;”
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> -----------------------------------------------
> Drs. Rinke Hoekstra
>
> Email: hoekstra@uva.nl    Skype:  rinkehoekstra
> Phone: +31-20-5253499     Fax:   +31-20-5253495
> Web:   http://www.leibnizcenter.org/users/rinke
>
> Leibniz Center for Law,          Faculty of Law
> University of Amsterdam,            PO Box 1030
> 1000 BA  Amsterdam,             The Netherlands
> -----------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>

Received on Saturday, 8 December 2007 09:32:47 UTC