Re: SW Graphical Notation

I'm having trouble understanding the purpose of having a common/accepted visual representation of an ontology.  Would this representation help in standardizing ontologies?  Would it help in transmitting ontologies?  Would tools be required to consume it?

This is not to say that there is not a pressing need for more ontology visualization tools.  On the contrary, every time I look at ontologies of any size, I become depressed at how bad ontology visualization tools are.  (Of course, what I want is to see just what I need to see, arranged in just the way that makes it easiest for me to understand aspects of the ontology that I understand.)  This seems to point out a need for research, not standardization, however.

Peter F. Patel-Schneider

On Jun 27, 2013, at 8:39 PM, Renato Iannella <ri@semanticidentity.com> wrote:

> 
> RDF/OWL have well-defined technical encodings (xml, turtle, etc) but there is no such common/accepted representation for a graphical notation.
> That is, a visual representation of an ontology that captures (graphically) all the semantics of RDF/OWL.
> 
> I have collected a few examples of various graphical notations here: http://www.w3.org/wiki/SemWebGraphicalNotation
> 
> Is there any interest from members of the SWIG to look at this in more detail, and potentially propose such graphical notation for RDF/OWL?
> (This could be via this IG or a new Community Group.)
> 
> Cheers...
> Renato Iannella
> Semantic Identity
> http://semanticidentity.com
> Mobile: +61 4 1313 2206
>