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

RE: [OEP] new Editor's draft of classes as values available - TITLE of NOTE

From: Christopher Welty <welty@us.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2005 09:54:28 -0500
To: "Uschold, Michael F" <michael.f.uschold@boeing.com>
Cc: "Natasha Noy" <noy@smi.stanford.edu>, public-swbp-wg@w3.org, public-swbp-wg-request@w3.org
Message-ID: <OFF99C1204.6EA94B15-ON85256FBE.005185C0-85256FBE.0051E1CE@us.ibm.com>
I would rather not change the title of the note.

-Chris

Dr. Christopher A. Welty, Knowledge Structures Group
IBM Watson Research Center, 19 Skyline Dr., Hawthorne, NY  10532     USA   
 
Voice: +1 914.784.7055,  IBM T/L: 863.7055, Fax: +1 914.784.7455
Email: welty@watson.ibm.com, Web: 
http://www.research.ibm.com/people/w/welty/



"Uschold, Michael F" <michael.f.uschold@boeing.com> 
Sent by: public-swbp-wg-request@w3.org
03/07/2005 09:15 PM

To
"Natasha Noy" <noy@smi.stanford.edu>
cc
<public-swbp-wg@w3.org>
Subject
RE: [OEP] new Editor's draft of classes as values available - TITLE of 
NOTE







NOTE that 90% of the note, as you point out, is NOT about "Representing
Classes As Property Values", and thus the title of the note is not
strictly accurate.

Rather, it is about what do do when you WANT to "Representing Classes As
Property Values".

A more accurate title for the note would be: 
"How to Proceed when you want to Representing Classes As Property Values
on the Semantic Web"

I don't particularly like it, but I may be willing to trade off
awkwardness for accuracy.

Comments?

Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: Natasha Noy [mailto:noy@smi.stanford.edu] 
Sent: Friday, March 04, 2005 4:48 PM
To: swbp
Subject: [OEP] new Editor's draft of classes as values available



The new version of the Editor's draft is available at the same location

[1] (also accessible from OEP page [2]).

I think we have converged on all the issues except for the abstract 
[3]. Chris, Mike, for the moment I conveniently assumed that you will 
agree with my last message [3], but we can still of course change it.

I went through the document and fixed most typos, references, etc. When

doing that I've also fixed a couple of extra issues that Mike brought 
up in his review and that I somehow missed (e.g., moving the SKOS 
discussion to a slightly different location).

Mike, I also edited your re-wording of approach 4 a bit, but I tried 
not to change the meaning or the order of sentences in your text to 
make it even more clear (I think). If you are going to re-read anything

in the document besides the abstract, this is the section to read.

Besides agreeing on the abstract, there is only one more thing 
remaining: shorter titles for the patterns, if we can come up with 
them. I've tried to come up with something, but I am not at all crazy 
about the result. It may not be that easy to do. Any thoughts on the 
list below?

1. Classes directly as property values
2. Parallel set of individuals for property values
3. Parallel hierarchy of individuals for property values
4. Classes with value restrictions as types
5. Classes as values for annotation properties

Other than that, I think we are done...

Natasha

[1] 
http://smi-web.stanford.edu/people/noy/ClassesAsValues/ClassesAsValues 
-2nd-WD.html
[2] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/OEP/
[3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Mar/0053.html
Received on Tuesday, 8 March 2005 14:55:06 UTC

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