W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-swbp-wg@w3.org > March 2005

[Fwd: Mail delivery failed: returning message to sender]

From: Alan Rector <rector@cs.man.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 08:53:27 +0000
Message-ID: <4226D087.7FD79336@cs.man.ac.uk>
To: best-practice <public-swbp-wg@w3.org>

>

(Some of this bounced for some reason.  Resending.)

> Mike, all
>
> Further comments in the morning on rereading.  There is a revised and redated version matching these
> comments with the order of the patterns reversed and other minor matters attended to at
>
>  http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~rector/swbp/specified_values/specified-values-8-1.html
>
> (the previous version is available at ...values-8x if anybody cares for the archives.)
>
> There is a link to an example of a suggested diagramming convention embedded with the query below.
>
> >.. Ok, so lets assume we really DO want them to read
>
> > further. You can easily introduce the two options by saying something
> > like:
> > "We introduce two patterns; the first is a simple and obvious one, but
> > it has problems. The second one is more complex, and addresses the
> > problems." Viola.
>
> OK - I'll turn it around.
>
> >
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > In short, I don't see an A/B comparison for the whole example. This
> > > might be confusing. I'm offline now, perhaps this is clear in the code
>
> I don't understand this comment.
>
> >
> >
> > > referred to at the end of the note in all the different syntaxes.
> > >
> > > It might help to have a figure for this variant, which shows the lack
> > > of the healthy_person class.
>
> Done.
>
> >
> > >
> > > PROBLEM: are there any good diagrammatic conventions for representing
> > > an anonymous restriction class? An early version of Network
> > > Inference's editor, Construct had a convention that I found terribly
> > > confusing. There may be no ideal solutions, each will have problems.
> > > You want the class it self to look like all other classes, so it
> > > should be an elipse, but you also want to indicate how it is defined
> > > too.
>
> As per previous accidentally off list - I don't know of one.  I've used the dotted lines and
> underline but that's the best I can suggest.
>
> On defined classes, my preference has always been for some symbol that brings together
> all the pieces of the definition and then attaches that to the class with a double arrow or identity
> sign. Some time ago - really before OWL - we tried to get a version of this agreed without finding
> much enthusiasm, but perhaps we should try again.  Or perhaps somebody else can take it as a
> starting point and suggest something better.
>
>  http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/%7Erector/swbp/specified_values/diagramming-convention-example.jpg
>
> It would be good to have an agreed and explicit set of conventions that made the distinction between
> primitive and defined classes clear and treated the ontology as a set of taxonomies plus links
> rather than either just a set of taxonomies or just a set of taxonomies plus links without any
> notion of definition.
>
> With Visio, a minor variant can be made to look more like UML if that is a value.
>
> >
> > >
> > > IDEA; for the future.  Future ontology editing tools may provide
> > > exlicit support for these ontology patterns, making it unnecessary to
> > > remember the boring bits, only their 'parameters'. e.g.  One could
> > > have the exponentially many disjoint axioms created automatically by
> > > saying a set of things are all mutally disjoint.
>
> We are already doing this in the Protege OWL wizards - and have produced a pluggable architecture
> to let others provide new wizards for new patterns.
>
> >
> > >
> > > 'quality space' is a new term, is it needed? What abot the term 'value
> >
> > > space' to refer to the space of possible values? Ive seen that term
> > > used.
>
> I moved it to "Feature" and "Feature space" but I don't know what the group will think.
>
> >
> > >
> > > "of discrete value" --> "of discreate valueS"
> > >
> > > Considerations using Pattern 1:
> > > * I suggest reorder them to indicate pros first and cons last.. There
> > > wasa much heated debate about making judgments, but when taken by
> > > themselves, most of these poits are clearlyl desirable or not.  Who
> > > would prefer for inferences to NOT work properly?  Who would argue
> > > that being NON-intuitive is a good thing?
>
> Done
>
> >
> > > * there is not an anonymous instance here, there is an anonymous class
>
> Don't understand above and had missed it on first reading.   In the value partition case, the
> symbols
> in the database are effectively Skolem constants for instances of the class whose name they bear.
> If I have a class Good_health_value and have a database column Health_value in which for patient
> 1234
> I have the entry "Good_health_value",  then that entry is acting as an anonymous instance - "The
> good health value for patient 1234".  The point is largely theoretical since I would rarely  look
> make use of the resulting inferences implied, but that is the formal reading unless I am gravely
> mistaken.
>
> >
> >
> > > (well ok, it is an instance of the meta-class OWL:Class, but that
> > > misses the point)
> > >
> > > "an unique" --> "a unique"  (may be ok both ways)
>
> Found and fixed.
>
> >
> > >
> > > Remove parens form the remark about unique name (or is it nameS)
> > > assumption. Prefix the sentence with "Importantly, "
>
> Google has both "unique name assumption" and "unique names assumption" but the plural seems to get
> the higher vote so I have changed it.
>
> >
> >
> > [MFU] You failed to comment on any of this. You studiously responded to
> > everything else. Any particular reason? I'm curious to know your views
> > on representing restriction-defeined classes digramatically.
>
> Hope this clears it up except where I am unclear.
>
> Regards - and thanks again.
>
> Alan
>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Alan L Rector
> > Professor of Medical Informatics
> > Department of Computer Science
> > University of Manchester
> > Manchester M13 9PL, UK
> > TEL: +44-161-275-6188/6149/7183
> > FAX: +44-161-275-6236/6204
> > Room: 2.88a, Kilburn Building
> > email: rector@cs.man.ac.uk
> > web: www.cs.man.ac.uk/mig
> >         www.opengalen.org
> >         www.clinical-escience.org
> >         www.co-ode.org
>
> --
> Alan L Rector
> Professor of Medical Informatics
> Department of Computer Science
> University of Manchester
> Manchester M13 9PL, UK
> TEL: +44-161-275-6188/6149/7183
> FAX: +44-161-275-6236/6204
> Room: 2.88a, Kilburn Building
> email: rector@cs.man.ac.uk
> web: www.cs.man.ac.uk/mig
>         www.opengalen.org
>         www.clinical-escience.org
>         www.co-ode.org

--
Alan L Rector
Professor of Medical Informatics
Department of Computer Science
University of Manchester
Manchester M13 9PL, UK
TEL: +44-161-275-6188/6149/7183
FAX: +44-161-275-6236/6204
Room: 2.88a, Kilburn Building
email: rector@cs.man.ac.uk
web: www.cs.man.ac.uk/mig
        www.opengalen.org
        www.clinical-escience.org
        www.co-ode.org
Received on Thursday, 3 March 2005 08:51:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:31:07 UTC