Re: [higgins-dev] Changes to higgins.owl (aka HOWL) committed (now v16)

["Sergey Lyakhov" <slyakhov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Paul,

> http://www.eclipse.org/higgins/ontologies/2006/higgins.owl has been
> updated
> to v16.

I see some problems with HOWL schema:

1. Now IMetadata interface is simple and single (there is no complex
metadata interface).
As a result  we need:
a) remove from HOWL schema "complexMetadata", "source", "timeSpan",
"creator", "validFrom", "validTo" properties and "TimeSpan" class;
b) (not obligatory) rename simpleMetadata to metadata;

2. Property "attribute" should be renamed to "value" (not obligatory). Also
this property should have "ComplexValue" as its domain, because now
ComplexValue can have attributes.

3. Now IComplexValue interface extends IHasAttributes insead of
IHasProperties. So we need to replace all DatatypeProperty properties (old
"complex value properties") like "subjectId" with appropriate "value"
subproperties (see p.2 above).

3.1. SubjectRelationship class (it is ComplexValue) has 2 properties -
"contextId" and "subjectId". Both of them should be "value" subproperties (I
suppose thay should be simple values). Also I do not understand what is
ContextId class - should it be a complex value?

4. We need a possibility to store metadata of Attribute, however I do not
see how we can use new "Attribute" class for this purpose. It looks we will
need to define some additional pair of property/class (metadata container)
for each type of attribute. But I do not see a good way how than to join
metadata with attribute.

5. I do not understand clearly how we should use Annotation Properties (like
"minLength", "pattern", "totalDigits" etc). As I suppose, we should use
these to describe/control possible data of SimpleValue. If so, what rules 
should we use?

I've attached the example of HOWL which describes my notes.

Thanks,
Sergey Lyakhov

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Paul Trevithick" <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "'Higgins (Trust Framework) Project developer discussions'"
<higgins-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2007 10:45 AM
Subject: [higgins-dev] Changes to higgins.owl (aka HOWL) committed (now v16)


> http://www.eclipse.org/higgins/ontologies/2006/higgins.owl has been
> updated
> to v16.
>
> 1. Changes related to F2F discussions, IdAS API, etc.
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
> * Rename existing Attribute class to "Value"
>
> * New class created to allow (from at the *IdAS* level is called "metadata
> on Attributes"):
>
> <owl:Class rdf:ID="Attribute">
>  <rdfs:comment>Instances of this class are used as the domain of
> higgins:metadata properties that, taken together, are considered to be the
> metadata about a higgins:attribute sub-property.
>  </rdfs:comment>
> </owl:Class>
>
> * This Attribute is a _new_ class (not to be confused with the
> higgins:Attribute in v15). It is needed to create some examples of how one
> can use this new higgins:Attribute to hold metadata for what, at the HOWL
> level, an entire set of values of a higgins:attribute sub-property. For
> example this could allow us to hold the "modifiedTime" on the _set_ of two
> values of eyeColor, "blue" and "green".
>
>
> 2. Better way to express relations and correlations.
> -----------------------------------------------------
> * The following changes don't change the intended semantics, just a
> cleaner
> use of OWL constructs. Instead of modeling inter-subject relationships
> ALWAYS using the higgins:attribute property and using either
> SubjectRelalationship instances or Correlation instances as its range
> (value), we use one of two alternative sub-properties of higgins:attribute
> (namely, higgins:relation and higgins:correlation) and ALWAYS use
> instances
> of SubjectRelationship as their ranges (values). This is more consistent.
>
> * Delete Correlation class
>
> * Add:
>
> <owl:ObjectProperty rdf:ID="relation">
>  <rdfs:subPropertyOf rdf:resource="#attribute"/>
>  <rdfs:comment>A directed relation between two Digital Subjects
>  </rdfs:comment>
>  <rdfs:range rdf:resource="#SubjectRelationship"/>
> </owl:ObjectProperty>
>
> * Add:
>
> <owl:ObjectProperty rdf:ID="correlation">
>  <rdfs:subPropertyOf rdf:resource="#relation"/>
>  <rdfs:comment>A directed relation between two Digital Subjects believed
> to
> represent the same underlying Entity
>  </rdfs:comment>
>  <rdfs:range rdf:resource="#SubjectRelationship"/>
> </owl:ObjectProperty>
>
> 3. Two new kinds of metadata
> ----------------------------
> * During the F2F these two kinds of metadata were mentioned during
> discussions of other topics.
>
> <owl:ObjectProperty rdf:ID="creator">
>  <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#Value"/>
>  <rdfs:range rdf:resource="#SubjectRelationship"/>
>  <rdfs:subPropertyOf rdf:resource="#complexMetadata"/>
> </owl:ObjectProperty>
>
> <owl:DatatypeProperty rdf:ID="creationTime">
>  <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#Value"/>
>  <rdfs:range rdf:resource="&xsd;date"/>
>  <rdfs:subPropertyOf rdf:resource="#simpleMetadata"/>
> </owl:DatatypeProperty>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> higgins-dev mailing list
> higgins-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/higgins-dev

Attachment: higgins.owl
Description: Binary data