- From: Jeff Heflin <heflin@cse.lehigh.edu>
- Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 12:02:32 -0500
- To: Jim Hendler <hendler@cs.umd.edu>
- CC: webont <www-webont-wg@w3.org>
ACTION: The editors will make the following changes after tomorrows telecon. Jim Hendler wrote: > > Jeff et al - > I have done a careful read through trying to ignore semantics and > simply copyedit the document. Below are changes that should be made > as they don't change the meaning of the document in any significant > way, but fix readability: > > Abstract: > change "goals, requirements and usage scenarios" > to "usage scenarios, goals and requirements" > so they parallel the document structure > > 1.1 > ... so that fine, accurate, ... > "fine" is ambiguous in this context - could be deleted or made > clearer (i.e. "detailed") > > 2.1 > 3rd para change - "In order allow more intelligent..." to > "In order to allow more intelligent" > missing word > > 2.2 > 3rd bullet of features > change "increases significantly" to > "significantly increases" > better English > > 2.4 > In this section single quote marks are used instead of double quotes > throuhgout, this is both bad English and inconsistent with remainder > of document. quote marks should be doubled or removed - recommended > rewrite included below (APPENDED 1) > In addition, suggest that the examples of constraints be slightly > reformatted for readability - also in the below (APPENDED 1) > In addition, centred -> centered as we are using US spellings > throughout rest of the document (or we can make whole thing UK > spellings - but that needs more editing) > > 2.5 > 1st paragraph > change "an social" to "a social" > change "and will use" to "an use" (consistent tense) > change " 'best' " to " "best" " (double quotes req.) > 2nd paragraph > perhaps change "...and the general Internet" to > "and the general Web" (or WWW or World Wide Web) > Internet is inconsistent w/earlier use of web as target > 3rd paragraph > change " 'virtual' cities " to " "virtual cities" " (fix quotes > and English) > > 2.6 > 1st and 2nd paragraphs > The term "ad hoc" is usually italicized, but in the case of "ad hoc > network" it sometimes isn't. Perhaps change the two uses of "ad hoc" > to <em> ad hoc </em>. > > 4th paragraph > change "human "in the loop" " to "human in the loop" (remove > quotes) - quotes not needed. > > 5th paragraph > change "DAML-S" to > <a href="http://www.daml.org/services/"> DAML-S </a> > to be consistent with linking to other languages mentioned > > Design goals - > note: throughout we use h3 and h4 to be consistent w/W3C style, but > it sure seems to me to make it easier to find the bold h4s than the > non-bold h3s. Probably shouldn't chnage - but someone should yell at > Dan C. about this :-> > > 3.2 > RDF Support - the paragraph ends with an unsupported clause in an argument. > suggest addition of "which perpetuates the error." at end of the section (i.e. > "...v1:Fish which perpetuates the error" > > 3.3 Justification > change "there needs to be primitives" to "there need to be > primitives" (fix number agreement) > change "map terms to equivalents" to "map terms to their > equivalents" (better English) > > 4 - requirements > Classes as instances > change "support the ability to treat class as instances." to > "support the ability to treat classes as instances." (agreement) > motivation - change "image collections use case" to > "multimedia collections use case" (Correct name - also needs to > be changed elsewhere, see below) > > 5 - objectives > default property values motivation > -> multimedia collection use case > > ability to state closed worlds > change "the language must ..." to "the language should..." > must is incompatible with the objectives statement where you say "maybe" > > commitment to portions of ontologies > change "choose" to "to choose" twice in the paragraph - need to > use infinitive verb form here. > > aggregation and grouping > change > "This would allow interoperability between ontologies that > represented information at different levels of granularity, and could > relate things such as budget category totals and budget line item > amounts, or number of personnel to individual data on employees" > to (note - only one word change!) > "This would allow interoperability between ontologies that > represented information at different levels of granularity, and could > relate things such as budget category totals to budget line item > amounts, or number of personnel to individual data on employees" > > the change of "and" to "to" makes the parallel construction work > > Definitional constraints on conjunctive types > There is an open quotation - you need to add a double quote after 1811 > -> multimedia collection use case > > ====== > APPENDED 1 - reworked 2.4 to fix quotes: > > <h3><a name="usecase-designdoc">2.4 Design documentation</a></h3> > > <p>This use case is for a large body of engineering documentation, > such as that used by the aerospace industry. This documentation can be of > several different types, including design documentation, > manufacturing documentation, > and testing documentation. These document sets each have a hierarchical > structure, but these structures differ between the sets. There is also > a set of implied axes which cross-link the documentation sets: for > example, in aerospace design documents, an item > such as a wing spar might appear in each.</p> > > <p>Ontologies can be used to build an information model which allows > the exploration > of the information space in terms of the items which are represented, the > associations between the items, the properties of the items, and the links to > documentation which describes and defines them (i.e., the external > justification > for the existence of the item in the model). That is to say that the > ontology and taxonomy > are not independent of the physical items they represent, but may be > developed/explored > in tandem.</p> > > <p>There are also issues of "effectivity" - design documentation may specify > a particular part-number with associated specification: in practice there > may be two (or more) suppliers for a part, and we need to know, for a given > aircraft, which supplier was used. (This is particularly relevant in accident > investigation, as both parts may satisfy a specification, but their > out-of-spec performances may differ).</p> > > <p>In the aerospace domain, typical users include:</p> > <ul> > <li>Maintenance engineer looking for all information relating > to a particular part (eg. "wing-spar"). > <li>Design engineer looking at > constraints on re-use of a particular sub-assembly. > </ul> > </p> > > <p>A common use of the ontology is to support the visualisation and > editing of charts which show snapshots of the information space centered on > a particular object (class or instance). These are typically activity/rule > diagrams or entity-relationship diagrams. </p> > > <p>This use case has the following needs: > <ul><li>Constraints, often for consistency checking. An example > constraint might be:<br> > (aircraft.type = biplane) <i>entails</i> > (CardinalityOf(InstancesOf(Class = Wing)) = 2)<br> > ( (wingsparX isComponentOf wingY) <i>entails</i> <br> > ( (wingsparX.length) < (wingY.length)) ) > > <li> Language-neutral representation - this is a multinational industry. > In fact one might call this dialect-neutral representation, as we find > multiple taxonomies for a given space, even in a single language > (not least in government). > > <li>Instances distinct from classes (see the discussion on > part-numbers and suppliers above). > > <li>N-ary relationships > > <li>Clean interface to other standards including (but not only) > XML-standards. This is a standards-based industry, and the clear > relationship of OWL to RDF/RDFS/DAML+OIL etc. is important. > </ul> > </p> > > -- > Professor James Hendler hendler@cs.umd.edu > Director, Semantic Web and Agent Technologies 301-405-2696 > Maryland Information and Network Dynamics Lab. 301-405-6707 (Fax) > AV Williams Building, Univ of Maryland College Park, MD 20742 > http://www.cs.umd.edu/users/hendler
Received on Wednesday, 27 February 2002 12:02:35 UTC