RE: em shared vocabulary

Model and the description were modified a while back (attached). Renato is going to incorporate them in the draft for your review. “Resource” is modeled  a bit differently now. See if it better serves the prupose.

Regards,

Mandana

 

 

From: public-xg-eiif-request@w3.org [mailto:public-xg-eiif-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of paola.dimaio@gmail.com
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2009 10:19 AM
To: Guido Vetere
Cc: public-xg-eiif
Subject: Re: em shared vocabulary

 


Thanks a lot Guido

what I am trying to do here (purely from my vocabulary viewpoint) is to reconcile the ontological process  aimed to conceptualize/abstract the  EM scenarios (which are very important, and so far DOLCE seems to have done very well), with the real world expectation fo someone who is bleeding to death and needs unambiguous commitment of a specific resource NOW! 

>From  that point of view , 'Service as a ‘promise’, i.e., roughly, a description of a commitment'  may not be enough, as would expect 'an ambulance service to be delivered within the shoftest possible time after the 999 call, and not roughly whenever it becomes available, for example.  

Capisci?

Not that I have a clue as to how to do that..... but at least we are making a start eh?

more questions follow

PDM



On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 5:03 PM, Guido Vetere <gvetere@it.ibm.com> wrote:


Paola, as I said, I would model Resource as a Relational role. Syntactically, it could be an OWL Property whose domain is Service (whatever it is) and whose range is defined on the union of Person and Artefact (and Funds?). Of course, if you want, you can also draw a specific Class to represent that range, however this would have no formal import. 
As for Service, please consider that the idea of splitting the class (concrete process and its description) is mine, and has nothing to do with DOLCE itself. By the way, I was with Nicola Guarino at a conference last week; he said that a Service is a ‘promise’, i.e., roughly, a description of a commitment. 

Cordiali Saluti, Best Regards,

Guido Vetere
Manager & Research Coordinator, IBM Center for Advanced Studies Rome
-----------------------
IBM Italia S.p.A.
via Sciangai 53, 00144 Rome, 
Italy
-----------------------
mail:     gvetere@it.ibm.com
phone: +39 06 59662137
mobile: +39 335 7454658






paola.dimaio@gmail.com 
Sent by: public-xg-eiif-request@w3.org 

26/03/2009 17.35 


To

public-xg-eiif <public-xg-eiif@w3.org> 


cc

 

Subject

Re: em shared vocabulary

 

  




Just to reiterate this point below  (rubbing it in actually)
that the relationship between capability and resource is inextricable in operations

I get an excerpt from one of our current working documents pasted below, which seems to be in contradiction with the
DOLCE  analysis (contained in the same document)

in the WHO section it says: 

    * Capability Properties: WorkingSector (to specify the nature of services that can be provided), resource
    * Relationship with: Resource

Resource represents tangible items and people that are used to respond to an incident.

    * Resource Properties: Equipment (vehicles, communication facilities, etc.), People (human force), Fund (any financial support), Supplies
    * Relationship with: locationInformation (to trace the resources in emergency operations)






On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 8:12 PM, <paola.dimaio@gmail.com> wrote: 
I am finally jotting down some definitions of the terms used in the framework document/diagram, to append to the final report, and as the basis for shared vocabulary work among different teams. I face a series of disparate and difficult issues, I may follow up with a few emails to request inputs on specifics

This is forcing me to take a closer look at the latest version of the draft, 
http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/eiif/XGR-framework-20090220/

and I have some questions/comments that come up

 I am looking at some of the notes regarding the DOLCE conceptualization of our framework, and I wonder how much of these notes should be reflected in our vocabulary, and how much should not be (whereby the description of the conceptualization is not relevant to the actual meaning of the term)

for example


re. DOLCE definitions 
ServiceService, in a concrete sense, can be seen as a Process, i.e. a perdurant (event) whose temporal parts may have different qualities (e.g. agreement, delivery, and conclusion). By looking at the attributes of the W3 class, however, it seems that the concept aims at modelling abstract and informative qualities such as Title and Description. To represent both informative properties and spatial-temporal ones under DOLCE’s conceptualization, Service might be split in two different classes: “ServiceDescription” (InformationObject) and “ServiceProcess” representing the concrete processes of service’s execution. 

I dont understand what ;'service' stands for , can someone provide some examples?  for me service is the provision of a resource, or a capability
is that something else?  is it intended as 'emergency service is the provision of emergency supplies?'


Capability 

Capability is used in W3 for representing the kind of actions Persons and Organization should be able to perform. This should be represented in DOLCE by an AbstractQuality (qualities inherent in non-physical endurants) whose value should range over a suitable abstract region, to be introduced. According to DOLCE, however, this would limit the ascription of (instances of) this class to non-physical endurants.  

I dont' know about DOLCE, but capability is the ability to provide resource (be it material supply or service , and which requires resources and infrastructure) 

Capability is directly related to resource availability, (not sure what you mean by 'abstract' here) 

cf.: 

Originally a military term which includes the aspects of personnel, equipment, training, planning and operational doctrine. Now used to mean a demonstrable capacity or ability to respond to and recover from a particular threat or hazard.
 <http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=X&start=6&oi=define&ei=-TnJSdTMOpDDjAe67f3FAw&sig2=JUYJ1Hbt3NQwnpZdwiAY7w&q=http://www.preparingforemergencies.gov.uk/more_info/glossary.shtm&usg=AFQjCNEk-oSR1nhceJFTRxg3lhfyuB-Apw> www.preparingforemergencies.gov.uk/more_info/glossary.shtm 


Resource 

It is not immediately clear what Resource could be in terms of DOLCE categories. The class looks like the union of three other classes Equipment, People, and Fund. Intuitively, Resource stands for any concrete thing that can be instrumental to the process of delivering a Service. It is questionable, however, whether a specific class is really needed here. 

Again, I dont know from the ontologist viewpoint, but from the operational viewpoint, resource is essential to the supply process, 

I cannot see how we can get away with modelling/representing it 

he 'categorization' of resources depends on the approach, they can be grouped according to the functional/operational role (say medical resource versus transport)  or material (medicine, food,) vs  intangible (know how, skills, knowledge, experience, competence) and so on, 

But it needs to be represented in any lexical, semantic and ontological schema that revolves around the supply of resources  (or please explain otherwise) 

cheers 

PDM 





-- 
Paola Di Maio, 
****************************************
Forthcoming
IEEE/DEST 09 Collective Intelligence Track (deadline extended)

i-Semantics 2009, 2 - 4 September 2009, Graz, Austria. www.i-semantics.tugraz.at <http://www.i-semantics.tugraz.at/> 

SEMAPRO 2009, Malta
http://www.iaria.org/conferences2009/CfPSEMAPRO09.html
**************************************************
Mae Fah Luang Child Protection Project, Chiang Rai Thailand






IBM Italia S.p.A.
Sede Legale: Circonvallazione Idroscalo - 20090 Segrate (MI) 
Cap. Soc. euro 400.001.359
C. F. e Reg. Imprese MI 01442240030 - Partita IVA 10914660153
Società soggetta all’attività di direzione e coordinamento di International Business Machines Corporation

(Salvo che sia diversamente indicato sopra / Unless stated otherwise above)




-- 
Paola Di Maio, 
****************************************
Forthcoming
IEEE/DEST 09 Collective Intelligence Track (deadline extended)

i-Semantics 2009, 2 - 4 September 2009, Graz, Austria. www.i-semantics.tugraz.at

SEMAPRO 2009, Malta
http://www.iaria.org/conferences2009/CfPSEMAPRO09.html
**************************************************
Mae Fah Luang Child Protection Project, Chiang Rai Thailand