- From: Uschold, Michael F <michael.f.uschold@boeing.com>
- Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 08:31:43 -0700
- To: "Thomas Baker" <thomas.baker@bi.fhg.de>
- Cc: "Thomas Baker" <thomas.baker@izb.fraunhofer.de>, "SW Best Practices" <public-swbp-wg@w3.org>
Yes, that about right. I would not say: "There are two ways..." which
will likely be interpreted to mean we think there are only two. Instead
say: "We identify two ways..." and leave open the possibility of others.
Unless we can be confident that we think there really ARE only two.
Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: Thomas Baker [mailto:thomas.baker@bi.fhg.de]
Sent: Friday, September 10, 2004 1:13 AM
To: Uschold, Michael F
Cc: Thomas Baker; SW Best Practices
Subject: Re: [VM] Scoping Draft with questions to TF members $swbpd
On Tue, Sep 07, 2004 at 12:44:36PM -0700, Uschold, Michael F wrote:
> As I understand it, your point is that OWL should be used
> "out of the box" to represent a thesaurus language directly --
> rather than using OWL first to represent some ad-hoc language
> of thesaurus relations and then, in turn, using that ad-hoc
> language to represent the thesaurus.
>
> [MFU] NO NO! I'm remaining agnoistic. The matter needs looking into.
> There may be benefits either way. Or there may be clear preferred
> choice.
Mike,
Have I correctly understood that you mean to say:
There are two alternative ways one might use OWL to
express a thesaurus: One could use native OWL constructs to
represent thesaurus relations. Or one could use OWL first
to represent a language of thesaurus relations and then use
that relation language to represent the thesaurus itself.
If so, I'm thinking the VM Note might state the issue, present
a few arguments each way, and point off to any available
sources of emerging solutions. Does that sound reasonable?
Tom
--
Dr. Thomas Baker Thomas.Baker@izb.fraunhofer.de
Institutszentrum Schloss Birlinghoven mobile +49-160-9664-2129
Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft work +49-30-8109-9027
53754 Sankt Augustin, Germany fax +49-2241-144-2352
Personal email: thbaker79@alumni.amherst.edu
Received on Monday, 13 September 2004 15:32:21 UTC