- From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
- Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 04:39:52 -0500 (EST)
- To: Svatek@vse.cz
- Cc: public-owl-wg@w3.org
From: Vojtech Svatek <Svatek@vse.cz> Subject: Re: Rich Annotations Use Cases Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 01:44:38 +0100 > Hi Peter, > > (coming back after a delay caused by my own illness plus mailbox crash...) > > You are right that things like 'reified n-ary properties' *can* be modelled > in different ways (though you only showed one alternative). The question > however is what *good* modelling practice looks like. > > The notion of 'reified n-ary property' is closely linked to the ontology > language expressivity, and, consequently, to the core of the > conceptualisation-coding process. It is not just a very specific feature to > be included 'in advance' so as to be possibly used by some arcane tools at > later phase (and thus only deserving to be imported through an ontology > specifically tailored to the needs of these tools). Maybe there are indeed > other alternatives to using annotations - I don't stick to this one - but > that you mentioned is not the right thing IMHO. > > To me, the lack of explicit n-ary properties is, in a way, a deficiency of > OWL wrt. other languages often used for 'ontological' modelling purposes. I > understand that complying with DL semantics is critical. On the other hand, > I believe that simple steps that ease compatibility with other, less > AI-ambitious modelling languages (such as UML or Topic Maps) in this and > other respects might improve the perception of OWL by kind-of external > communitites. > > All such 'pattern-oriented' annotation types I have in mind are, in Bijan's > terms, 'canIgnore' ones (although I am also interested in e.g. uncertainty > extensions - but that's another story). > > My plan now is to have a bit of discussion with some 'patterns' guys first, > offline, and then return with some consolidated proposal. Sure, go ahead, but remember, that if there isn't something for the WG to do, and the WG is about language design, then I don't see how this useful effort is related to the WG > Bijan, would it > be OK if I then add a few bullets to [1] at some point? > > Regards > > Vojtech > > [1] http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/Annotation_System#Examples peter
Received on Tuesday, 13 November 2007 09:53:05 UTC