6./ did not come from me, but was a result of an earlier discussion
on this list.
It means, e.g., that if the ontology is in OWL, then it should
support OWL reasoners. (I think it means further that if the ontology
authors make claims on its behalf of a dynamic sort, then these
claims should be tested.) (01)
7. /The ontology has unique IDs for its terms.
This resolved yesterday I think. (I think it is trivial) (02)
8. /The ontology is adequately labeled. /
Not my favorite wording, but it means things like:
An Ontology for Proteins should be called "Protein Ontology" and not,
e.g., the "Hubert Humphrey Memorial Reference Information Model for
Dynamic Proteomic Data Management Using Whizz Conceptual Technology Plug-Ins" (03)
9. /The ontology has a plurality of users.
The old DAML repository has some 39 agent ontologies. I would suggest
that we need practically motivated strategies for avoiding similar
outcomes in OOR. One such strategy, adopted by the OBO Foundry, is to
admit ontologies only when they have a plurality of (independent)
users. This means that they have already passed certain practical tests.
BS (04)
At 10:16 PM 3/31/2008, you wrote:
>Natasha,
>I agree that this is unclear. Barry proposed (6-9) in his email from
>March 19th without going into the specifics. Barry, could you clarify
>what you mean?
>Thanks
>Fabian
>
>On Mar 31, 2008, at 6:58 PM, Natasha Noy wrote:
>
>>One more question
>>
>>>== Summary: Gatekeeping/ Minimal Requirements ==
>>>
>>>1. Openness (see below)
>>>2. /The ontology is expressed in a formal language with a well- defined
>>>syntax./
>>>3. /The authors of the ontology provide the required metadata. /
>>>4. /The ontology has a clearly specified and clearly delineated
>>>scope.
>>>/5. /Successive versions of an ontology are clearly identified.
>>>/6. /The ontology has passed certain dynamic tests. /
>>>7. /The ontology has unique IDs for its terms. /
>>>8. /The ontology is adequately labeled. /
>>>9. /The ontology has a plurality of users.
>>>/
>>
>>On #8: What does "adequately labeled" mean here? I couldn't find a
>>discussion of this item. Can you clarify, please?
>>
>>Thanks a lot!
>>
>>Natasha
>>
>>
>>
>>_________________________________________________________________
>>Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
>>Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/
>>Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2008/
>>Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2008
>>Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/
>
> (05)
_________________________________________________________________
Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2008/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2008
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/ (06)
|