I don't think this is going to be, or should be, a "cooperative
development" in the way that Joel seems to suggest. In the proposed plan
there are only one or two editors who actually modify the ontologies.
Everyone else develops issues which are discussed and if accepted that
are implemented by the editors. This is a "standards-making 101"
methodology, along the lines of what happens in OMG and ISO, which I
fully support. So, my view is that this process really isn't very much
like software development at all. (01)
Cheers,
David (02)
On Tue, 2009-07-14 at 12:13 -0400, Joel Bender wrote:
> Evan,
>
>
> > There is no "canonical form" for serializing an OWL model in rdf/xml.
>
> A huge hole for cooperative development of a model.
>
> > Do people anticipate changes in the serialized form to be a problem?
>
> Yes. I would like to use tools that can track changes to a set of
> documents, knowing who's been making changes and what changes have been
> made.
>
> I'm offering to put up a server that is running Trac [1] with a
> Mercurial [2] repository that would allow us to cooperate on documents.
> There is a bit of a learning curve, but I think we can cooperatively
> work out issues in short order.
>
> Anyone can put anything in the repository they want, and key for me is
> that I can get an updated version of what everyone has contributed in a
> simple way.
>
> As part of this development, I would also like to use tools that can
> "build" and "test" this ontology against a set of use cases. The errors
> and warnings from the build/test/validate test results can feed into
> tickets to make sure issues and problems are assigned to specific
> individuals or groups and resolved.
>
> For example, if I'm running TopBraid and change something to an
> owl:InverseFunctionalProperty and post it, everyone is notified of the
> change, that I made it, and when I run Pellet [3] or some other
> reasoner, it tells me I'm an idiot. Or something more kind.
>
> If I make a change to our eventual publication (and please allow it to
> be RTF or Open Office or something other than binary Microsoft Word
> files), that should be clear as well.
>
> I see a lot of this work as very similar to programming, but then again,
> I'm a programmer :-).
>
>
> Joel
>
> [1] <http://trac.edgewall.org/>
> [2] <http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/>
> [3] <http://clarkparsia.com/pellet/>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/uom-ontology-std/
> Subscribe: mailto:uom-ontology-std-join@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Config/Unsubscribe:
>http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/uom-ontology-std/
> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/UoM/
> Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?UoM_Ontology_Standard
>
--
UK +44 20 8747 3900
Mobile +44 7788 561308
Skype +1 336 283 0606 (03)
Eurostep Limited. Registered in England and Wales No.03049099
Registered Office: Cwttir Lane, St. Asaph, Denbighshire LL17 0LQ. (04)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/uom-ontology-std/
Subscribe: mailto:uom-ontology-std-join@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Config/Unsubscribe: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/uom-ontology-std/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/UoM/
Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?UoM_Ontology_Standard (05)
|