- 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