- From: Boris Motik <boris.motik@comlab.ox.ac.uk>
- Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2008 22:24:13 +0100
- To: "'Vojtech Svatek'" <Svatek@vse.cz>
- Cc: "'Kaarel Kaljurand'" <kaljurand@gmail.com>, <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
Hello, Using both forms might be really awkward. There is not that much space and I don't really know how to link the two sentences together. Using two forms seems to me like saying "We weren't able to decide". Regards, Boris > -----Original Message----- > From: public-owl-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-owl-wg-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Vojtech Svatek > Sent: 14 September 2008 21:16 > To: Boris Motik > Cc: 'Kaarel Kaljurand'; public-owl-wg@w3.org > Subject: RE: English examples in the OWL 2 syntax specification > > > Hi Boris, all, > > My (instant) suggestion would be: > - to use *both* forms when the particular construct is used for the first > time, for sure > - then to only use one of them (to reduce verbosity), probably the natural > language one. > > I definitely advise to systematically use, in a single example, either the > names with the prefix ('a:') or the common names only. To say, either we > talk about a relationship of semantic web entities: "a:Brian is a a:Dog" > (referring to an individual identified by a URL, and a class from the > particular ontology), or "Brian is a dog" (which means that the identity of > the individual and the set-theoretic meaning of the 'dog' concept follow, > considering the sentence by itself, from some context - which merely > happens to coincide with the mentioned URIs). > > Regards > Vojtech > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Vojtech Svatek, University of Economics, Prague > Nam.W.Churchilla 4, 13067 Praha 3, CZECH REPUBLIC > phone: +420 224095495, e-mail: svatek@vse.cz > web: http://nb.vse.cz/~svatek > > > > -----public-owl-wg-request@w3.org napsal: ----- > > >Komu: "'Kaarel Kaljurand'" <kaljurand@gmail.com>, > ><public-owl-wg@w3.org> > >Od: "Boris Motik" <boris.motik@comlab.ox.ac.uk> > >Odeslal: public-owl-wg-request@w3.org > >Datum: 14.09.2008 21:59 > >Předmět: RE: English examples in the OWL 2 syntax specification > > > > > >(I redirected this discussion to public-owl-wg, because I feel this > >is a more appropriate list.) > > > >Hello, > > > >Thanks a lot for this analysis -- it is certainly important to make > >the examples as consistent as possible. > > > >Before I change the examples, though, I believe we need to decide on > >the purpose of the English examples. I included them into the > >spec because I felt that many readers could benefit from an intuitive > >explanation what a particular axiom means. At first, I tried > >not to use the actual OWL elements in the example; thus, I would > >explain an axiom > > > >SubClassOf( a:Child a:Person ) > > > >with the sentence "Children are people". But then, some people > >complained about such paraphrasing of the axioms: they felt that > >this > >was imprecise. Instead, they thought we should paraphrase this axiom > >as "Each instance of a:Child is an instance of a:Person as > >well" -- that is, to use a more modeling-centric view. I updated much > >of the spec; however, I did not know myself what to do in many > >cases. Thus, it is highly likely that the examples are inconsistent. > > > >Now the question is really what approach to adopt. I still believe > >that having some kind of English explanation would be very > >useful. I'd like to hear from others about what kind of approach to > >adopt there -- a more natural-language one or a more OWL-centric > >one. > > > >Thanks again -- I find this analysis really useful. > > > >Regards, > > > > Boris > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: public-owl-dev-request@w3.org > >[mailto:public-owl-dev-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Kaarel > >> Kaljurand > >> Sent: 14 September 2008 20:26 > >> To: public-owl-dev@w3.org > >> Subject: English examples in the OWL 2 syntax specification > >> > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> I extracted all the examples from the OWL 2 Syntax specification > >(a > >> revision from > >> the end of August) to see how the specification expresses the OWL > >> axioms in English. > >> After sorting the examples by the axioms, many irregularities in > >the > >> English expressions > >> were revealed. I think most of the irregularities are > >unintended/unwanted. > >> > >> See the report: > >> > >> > >http://www.cl.uzh.ch/kalju/ontologies/OWL_spec/owl_spec_examples.html > > > >> > >> -- > >> kaarel >
Received on Sunday, 14 September 2008 21:25:54 UTC