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

Re: [SWBP]FAQ?

From: Christopher Welty <welty@us.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2005 11:06:46 -0500
To: Alan Rector <rector@cs.man.ac.uk>
Cc: "Uschold, Michael F" <michael.f.uschold@boeing.com>, Natasha Noy <noy@smi.stanford.edu>, swbp <public-swbp-wg@w3.org>, public-swbp-wg-request@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF71C26181.56D7D700-ON85256FBF.00586844-85256FBF.005882E6@us.ibm.com>
Great idea.  Like all great ideas, it needs someone to execute. 
Volunteers?

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/



Alan Rector <rector@cs.man.ac.uk> 
Sent by: public-swbp-wg-request@w3.org
03/09/2005 03:27 AM

To
Christopher Welty/Watson/IBM@IBMUS
cc
"Uschold, Michael F" <michael.f.uschold@boeing.com>, Natasha Noy 
<noy@smi.stanford.edu>, swbp <public-swbp-wg@w3.org>, 
public-swbp-wg-request@w3.org
Subject
[SWBP]FAQ?






All 
Given the number of notes, naming histories, and the fact that we will 
never come up with names that are intuitive to all sectors of the 
audience, would it be sensible to try to move towards a supplementary FAQ 
style index, e.g. 
Q: I need to refer to the classes in an ontology to describe the content 
of documents, books, films, etc. What should I look at? 
A: See Classes as Values (URL). 
If we made providing one-to-three such questions something that each 
person did when they drafted a note and then discussed them briefly, I 
think we could do this with a low effort on everybody's part.  Experience 
with other things suggests that such notes, particularly when used in this 
way just as an index/pointers are less contentious than names and allow 
several questions to point to the same resource.  They would also help 
focus us on what the notes are for. 
Regards 
Alan 
 
Given the 
Christopher Welty wrote: 
  
I liked the idea of naming the patterns until I saw the suggested names. I 
suggest dropping this issue, I think it will take too long to come up with 
good names - I disagree with most of these (some are confusing and/or 
ambiguous). 
 
-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 09:09 PM


To
"Natasha Noy" <noy@smi.stanford.edu>, "swbp" <public-swbp-wg@w3.org>
cc
Christopher Welty/Watson/IBM@IBMUS
Subject
RE: [OEP] new Editor's draft of classes as values available





 
 
Natasha, 
Thanks for having a go at naming the approaches. Tough job.  I looked at 
my original review notes which focused on WHAT EXACTLY IS THE VALUE OF 
WHAT PROPERTY.  This is the essential thing that distinguishes each 
approach. So, my names suggest answers to that question for each. 
And the NEW SUGGESTION IS: 
1.                 classes as values [the direct approach] 
2.                 class instances as values 
3.                 parallel classes instances as values 
4.                 implicit class instances as values 
5.                 classes as annotation property values 
I think these are all accurate, getting to the heart of the matter, and 
are reasonably short. 
What do you think? 
Your suggestions: 
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 
My notes... 
o                 1:  the actual class, e.g. Lion 
the relationship of this value to the class Lion is identity (it IS the 
class) 
o                 2:  an instance (called LionSubject) of the class: Lion 
denoting 
the subject of Lions. 
The relationship of this value to the class, Lion is: rdf:Type (or 
instance) 
o                 3:  an instance (called LionSubject) of the class: 
Subject 
denoting the subject of Lions. 
LionSubject is related to the class Lion via an rdf:seeAlso link. 
o                 4: an [implicit] unidentified instance of the class 
Lion. 
The relationship of this [nonexistent implicit] value to the class Lion 
is rdf:type 
o                 5: the actual class, e.g. Lion 
the relationship of this value to the class Lion is identity (it IS the 
class) 
NB: this is identical to approach 1. The difference is that the property 
is an annotation property. 
 
 
-----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 
 
 
 
 
-- 
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 Wednesday, 9 March 2005 17:03:06 UTC

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