- From: Jos De_Roo <jos.deroo@agfa.com>
- Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2004 22:27:59 +0100
- To: "Natasha Noy <noy" <noy@SMI.Stanford.EDU>
- Cc: public-swbp-wg@w3.org
Natasha Noy wrote: [...] > 3. Create a catalog of SW tools which not only categorizes them > according to what they do, but also gives people some sense of how > good they are, or perhaps who are they good for (e.g., if you are a > logician and are comfortable with formal concepts, A is a tools for > you; if you are willing to sacrifice some expressiveness for not > having to deal with complex formalisms and interfaces, go for B"). It > may be hard to categorize tools as good or bad, but this more > usage-oriented categorization may work. sounds like that that categorization could be an ontology on it's own :) (or eat your own dogfood...) that "usage-oriented categorization" is definitely very useful I guess (and avoids opinions...) -- Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/
Received on Thursday, 4 March 2004 16:28:43 UTC