- From: Bernard Vatant <bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>
- Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2005 12:45:44 +0200
- To: "Jeff Z. Pan" <jpan@csd.abdn.ac.uk>, <public-swbp-wg@w3.org>
- Cc: "Phil Tetlow" <philip.tetlow@uk.ibm.com>, "Holger Knublauch" <holgi@stanford.edu>
- Message-ID: <GOEIKOOAMJONEFCANOKCOEIAGPAA.bernard.vatant@mondeca.com>
... and the corresponding RDF/XML file ... > -----Message d'origine----- > De : public-swbp-wg-request@w3.org > [mailto:public-swbp-wg-request@w3.org]De la part de Bernard Vatant > Envoyé : samedi 8 octobre 2005 12:40 > À : Jeff Z. Pan; public-swbp-wg@w3.org > Cc : Phil Tetlow; Holger Knublauch > Objet : Semanticworks screenshot RE: [SE] OOSD note > > > > Attached is a screenshot in the Altova Semanticworks GUI, of the same "Customer" class > shown in the Protégé screenshot of the note. > > Bernard > > > -----Message d'origine----- > > De : public-swbp-wg-request@w3.org > > [mailto:public-swbp-wg-request@w3.org]De la part de Bernard Vatant > > Envoyé : samedi 8 octobre 2005 12:04 > > À : Jeff Z. Pan; public-swbp-wg@w3.org > > Cc : Phil Tetlow; Holger Knublauch > > Objet : RE: [SE] OOSD note > > > > > > > > > > Hello all > > > > Two remarks on this vey interesting note > > > > 1. I already made a comment about the definition of OWL classes as "sets" of > individuals > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swbp-wg/2005Oct/0045.html > > No answer so far, but I see it has been included in the OO/OWL comparison > table, so ... > > > > 2. [TODO: Possibly also include screenshots of other tools (Cerebra has been > > suggested) - > > I welcome contributions -- hk] > > Maybe it would be worth considering the new Altova tool Semanticworks > > http://www.altova.com/products_semanticworks.html > > The interesting thing is that this tool has been developed as part of an XML toolkit, > > which makes it quite different of Protégé or SWOOP. The GUI will sound > familiar to users > > of XMLSpy, but quite weird to Protégé users. I've downloaded and tried it a bit. There > > seems to remain quite a bunch a bugs in this early version, but worth looking > at anyway. > > To many people in this group, it will be strange to see how it handles "ontology > > validation", which IMO seems to look more like an XML schema validation. > "Validation" of > > files edited under Protégé and SWOOP gives strange bunches of "errors", and > if you edit > > them, you get of course yet another serialization. I had already experienced > > that kind of > > problems between Protégé and SWOOP, so it is not big news :)) > > > > This leads me to note that maybe there is something misleading in section 3.1 > > > > "RDF just defines the very basic syntax for Semantic Web content, and has an XML > > serialization that allows users to share models on the Web." > > > > It would be more honest to point that RDF has *many* XML serializations, and > > that the same > > set of triples can be expressed in an unbound variety of syntaxes, none of them being > > canonical, and which are likely to become arbitrarily complex for large RDF > > graphs (which > > I stick to think is a major issue for wide adoption and interoperability). So > maybe the > > document should include somewhere that tools editors should be aware of > issues raised by > > this very variety of syntaxes, and that "conformant" RDF tools (which somehow handle > > internally the semantics of RDF) are bound to exchange RDF not only with each > other, but > > with more loosy applications which will rely more on XML structure than on > > underlying RDF > > semantics, and of which RDF parsers are likely to be less tolerant to exotic > > serializations. > > > > My concern here is that this group should make the community aware of the risk > > of building > > software environments able to use only on a specific, and de facto "proprietary" RDF > > serialization. Now that we begin to have a variety of RDF tools coming to the > > market from > > various backgrounds, it would be good to address real life interoperability > issues, like > > "Can I edit an ontology exported from Protégé into SWOOP, Altova Semanticworks ... and > > send it back to Protégé without loosing anything?". Maybe this is not exactly > > in the scope > > of this note, but seems somehow related. > > > > Bernard > > > > > > ---------------------------------- > > Bernard Vatant > > Mondeca Knowledge Engineering > > bernard.vatant@mondeca.com > > (+33) 0871 488 459 > > > > http://www.mondeca.com > > http://universimmedia.blogspot.com > > ---------------------------------- > > > > > -----Message d'origine----- > > > De : public-swbp-wg-request@w3.org > > > [mailto:public-swbp-wg-request@w3.org]De la part de Jeff Z. Pan > > > Envoyé : vendredi 7 octobre 2005 16:24 > > > À : public-swbp-wg@w3.org > > > Cc : Phil Tetlow; Holger Knublauch > > > Objet : [SE] OOSD note > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > The OOSD note is now available from the SETF homepage. > > > > > > http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/SE/ODSD/ > > > > > > Greetings, > > > Jeff > > > > > > -- > > > Jeff Z. Pan (http://www.csd.abdn.ac.uk/~jpan/) > > > Department of Computing Science, The University of Aberdeen > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
Attachments
- text/xml attachment: model.rdf
Received on Saturday, 8 October 2005 10:45:59 UTC