Re: ssn: value add of dul

Hi Kerry,

I would feel really, really uncomfortable to invite Aldo to question him 
about the user base and stability of DUL. We took the decision to 
uncouple (new) SSN from DUL a long, long time ago and now we are 
discussing whether the 'alignment' should be normative or non-normative 
and what exactly we mean by 'alignment'. This matters because it may 
impact our alignment with O&M. If we mean an alignment in terms of OWL 
subclassing and so forth, then there is not such thing as an 'informal' 
or 'optional' alignment as all axioms in OWL are born equal. Also, 
please note that O&M is an international standard developed by the OGC 
on the topic at hand, namely observations and so on, while DUL is a 
foundational ontology. Btw, this is not a statement about the quality of 
DUL and Aldo's work (for which I have the highest respect). Finally, if 
we have a normative DUL alignment and it is in a new namespace and so is 
SSN, do we have to provide implementation details for each part of the 
alignment? I recall that this is an argument that you tend to use in 
other cases.

Best,
Krzysztof

On 01/24/2017 03:49 PM, Kerry Taylor wrote:
>
> Dear SDW,
>
> I don’t know why, but today in the ssn meeting the question of whether 
> ssn should be aligned to dul or not was brought up again.  I think it 
> was covering old, well-resolved ground that is reflected in our 
> current published WD, but this seems not to be agreed.
>
> Therefore I propose we invite the author of dul (actually DOLCE+DnS 
> Ultralite) Aldo Gangemi to an ssn meeting to present on the 
> virtues/stability/value/users/use etc of dul in association with ssn.
>
> Kerry
>


-- 
Krzysztof Janowicz

Geography Department, University of California, Santa Barbara
4830 Ellison Hall, Santa Barbara, CA 93106-4060

Email: jano@geog.ucsb.edu
Webpage: http://geog.ucsb.edu/~jano/
Semantic Web Journal: http://www.semantic-web-journal.net