At 10:38 AM -0700 4/1/08, Natasha Noy wrote:
>On Apr 1, 2008, at 10:30 AM, Pat Hayes wrote:
>
>>At 11:15 AM -0400 4/1/08, Barry Smith wrote:
>>>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.
>>
>>? What does that mean? That it should not produce errors when
>>tested using OWL reasoners? That would seem to be reasonable. Maybe
>>the OOR should offer 'validation' tools to check at least syntactic
>>correctness, or require ontologies to have evidence of external
>>validation.
>
>Then you have to be specific as to which reasoner: the state of the
>art is such, that depending on the constructs you use, your ontology
>can be perfectly valid OWL, but some OWL reasoners will not be happy
>with it, whereas others would think it is just fine. (01)
The more information you can give, the better, I'd say. (02)
>I think it is reasonable to include the validation information as
>metadata, along with the specific reasoner used, but perhaps not as
>a requirement, just because it can be quite vague. (03)
I agree. If it hasn't been tested, the metadata should say so. (04)
Pat (05)
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973 home
40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office
Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax
FL 32502 (850)291 0667 cell
http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us
http://www.flickr.com/pathayes/collections (06)
_________________________________________________________________
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/ (07)
|