'Ontology Design Patterns' - User contributions [en]

User:IlariaTiddi

2019-01-08T10:49:51Z

EnricoDaga:

{{User Template
|FirstName=Ilaria
|LastName=Tiddi
|Gender=Female
|Picture=ODPUser.png
|EmailAddress=ilaria.tiddi@gmail.com
|HomePage=http://people.kmi.open.ac.uk/ilaria/
|Organization=Knowledge Media Institute
|OrganizationType=Educational Training and Research Institution
|OrganizationWebSite=http://kmi.open.ac.uk/
|Country=United Kingdom United Kingdom (GB)
|Role=PhD Student
}}
{{Account Request Template
|Motivation=To have some help to solve modeling problems
|PossibleMainContribution=To have some help to solve modeling problems, To help other users to solve modeling problems
|DomainsOfInterest=Ontology
|ExpertOfDomains=Ontology,
|HowDidIKnowAbout=conference/public events, surfing the web
}}

User:EnricoDaga

2019-01-08T10:47:14Z

EnricoDaga:

{{User Template
|FirstName=Enrico
|LastName=Daga
|Gender=Male
|Picture=Edew.jpg
|EmailAddress=enrico.daga@open.ac.uk
|HomePage=http://www.enridaga.net
|Organization=The Open University
|OrganizationType=Educational Training and Research Institution
|OrganizationWebSite=http://kmi.open.ac.uk
|Country=United Kingdom United Kingdom (GB)
|Role=Researcher
}}
{{Account Request Template
|Motivation=Join the vision of ODP
|PossibleMainContribution=To have some help to solve modeling problems, To help other users to solve modeling problems
|DomainsOfInterest=Ontology, Workflow
|ExpertOfDomains=Ontology, Software Engineering, Web2.0, Linked Data
|HowDidIKnowAbout=friends
}}

[[Category:ODPUser]]

File:Edew.jpg

2012-09-11T09:01:05Z

EnricoDaga: uploaded a new version of "Image:Edew.jpg"

User:EnricoDaga

2012-09-11T08:58:37Z

EnricoDaga:

{{User Template
|FirstName=Enrico
|LastName=Daga
|Gender=Male
|Picture=Edew.jpg
|EmailAddress=enrico.daga@cnr.it
|HomePage=http://www.enridaga.net
|Organization=STLab (ISTC - CNR)
|OrganizationType=Educational Training and Research Institution
|OrganizationWebSite=http://www.stlab.istc.cnr.it
|Country=Italy (IT)
|Role=PhD Student
}}
{{Account Request Template
|Motivation=Join the vision of ODP application in computer science, propose patterns and - last but not least - maintain and improve this web portal ;)
|PossibleMainContribution=To have some help to solve modeling problems, To help other users to solve modeling problems
|DomainsOfInterest=Ontology, Workflow
|ExpertOfDomains=Ontology, Software Engineering, Web2.0, Linked Data
|HowDidIKnowAbout=friends
}}
See also:
http://stlab.istc.cnr.it/stlab/User:EnricoDaga

[[Category:ODPUser]]

User:EnricoDaga

2012-09-11T08:58:09Z

EnricoDaga:

{{User Template
|FirstName=Enrico
|LastName=Daga
|Gender=Male
|Picture=Edew.png
|EmailAddress=enrico.daga@cnr.it
|HomePage=http://www.enridaga.net
|Organization=STLab (ISTC - CNR)
|OrganizationType=Educational Training and Research Institution
|OrganizationWebSite=http://www.stlab.istc.cnr.it
|Country=Italy (IT)
|Role=PhD Student
}}
{{Account Request Template
|Motivation=Join the vision of ODP application in computer science, propose patterns and - last but not least - maintain and improve this web portal ;)
|PossibleMainContribution=To have some help to solve modeling problems, To help other users to solve modeling problems
|DomainsOfInterest=Ontology, Workflow
|ExpertOfDomains=Ontology, Software Engineering, Web2.0, Linked Data
|HowDidIKnowAbout=friends
}}
See also:
http://stlab.istc.cnr.it/stlab/User:EnricoDaga

[[Category:ODPUser]]

User:EnricoDaga

2012-09-11T08:57:05Z

EnricoDaga:

{{User Template
|FirstName=Enrico
|LastName=Daga
|Gender=Male
|Picture=ODPUser.png
|EmailAddress=enrico.daga@cnr.it
|HomePage=http://www.enridaga.net
|Organization=STLab (ISTC - CNR)
|OrganizationType=Educational Training and Research Institution
|OrganizationWebSite=http://www.stlab.istc.cnr.it
|Country=Italy (IT)
|Role=PhD Student
}}
{{Account Request Template
|Motivation=Join the vision of ODP application in computer science, propose patterns and - last but not least - maintain and improve this web portal ;)
|PossibleMainContribution=To have some help to solve modeling problems, To help other users to solve modeling problems
|DomainsOfInterest=Ontology, Workflow
|ExpertOfDomains=Ontology, Software Engineering, Web2.0, Linked Data
|HowDidIKnowAbout=friends
}}
See also:
http://stlab.istc.cnr.it/stlab/User:EnricoDaga

[[Category:ODPUser]]

User:ZhengjieFan

2011-07-18T09:29:09Z

EnricoDaga: Creating user page with biography of new user.

{{User Template
|FirstName=Zhengjie
|LastName=Fan
|Gender=Female
|Organization=INRIA & LIG
|OrganizationType=Educational Training and Research Institution
|Country=France (FR)
|Picture=ODPUser.png
}}
{{Account Request Template
|Motivation=learn more about ontology
|PossibleMainContribution=To have some help to solve modeling problems, To help other users to solve modeling problems
|HowDidIKnowAbout=colleagues
}}

'Ontology Design Patterns':Development

2011-07-05T13:49:30Z

EnricoDaga:

A complete task list can be found [[Odp:Tasks|here]].

{{Create task link}} This is only for users in ''EditorialBoard'' group.

'Ontology Design Patterns':Development

2011-07-05T13:49:20Z

EnricoDaga:

A complete task list can be found [[Odp:Tasks|here]].

User:LucaBogani

2011-04-11T17:45:51Z

EnricoDaga: Creating user page with biography of new user.

{{User Template
|FirstName=Luca
|LastName=Bogani
|Gender=Male
|Organization=Politecnico di Milano
|OrganizationType=Educational Training and Research Institution
|OrganizationWebSite=http://www.polimi.it
|Country=Italy (IT)
|Role=Student
|Picture=ODPUser.png
}}
{{Account Request Template
|Motivation=I'm doing the final thesis of my studies on ODPs
|PossibleMainContribution=To help other users to solve modeling problems
|HowDidIKnowAbout=colleagues
}}

Template:All proposed content OP

2010-10-17T10:35:51Z

EnricoDaga:

<noinclude>

</noinclude>
{{#ask:[[Category:ProposedContentOP]]|?hasIntent=Intent|?PatternDomain=Domain|?SubmittedBy=Submitted by|format=table|sort=}}

Template:All proposed content OP

2010-10-17T10:35:19Z

EnricoDaga:

<noinclude>

</noinclude>
{{#ask:[[Category:ProposedContentOP]]|?OWLBuildingBlock=OWL|?hasIntent=Intent|?PatternDomain=Domain|?SubmittedBy=Submitted by|format=table|sort=}}

Submissions:ContentOPs

2010-09-25T11:14:08Z

EnricoDaga:

Below you find the currently proposed Content OPs (CPs).

New proposals of CPs are very welcome.
Please [[Submissions:ProposeCP| post a new proposal]] if you want to contribute.

{{Info tip
|Before posting your proposed Content OP, check the [[Community:Domain| list of domains]]. If your domain is not in the list, create a page for it.
}}

=== Proposed Content OPs ===
{{All proposed content OP}}

WOP2009:Main

2010-07-15T08:24:07Z

EnricoDaga: Redirecting to WOP:2009

#REDIRECT [[WOP:2009]]

'Ontology Design Patterns':WOP2010

2010-06-22T08:02:05Z

EnricoDaga: Redirecting to WOP:2010

#REDIRECT [[WOP:2010]]

== Welcome to the 2nd Workshop on Ontology Patterns - WOP2010 ==
This is the second edition in a series of yearly workshops addressing the emerging topic of ontology patterns as best practices, related to the [[Ontology_Design_Patterns_._org_(ODP) |''ontologydesignpatterns.org'']] initiative. Patterns need to be shared by a community in order to provide a common language and stimulate pattern usage and development. Hence, the aim of this workshop is twofold; both providing an arena for proposing and discussing good practices, patterns, pattern-based ontologies, systems etc., and broadening the pattern community that will develop its own “language” for discussing and describing relevant problems and their solutions.

The second edition of WOP will be held in conjunction with [http://iswc2010.semanticweb.org/ ISWC 2010] (the first workshop was held in conjunction with [http://iswc2009.semanticweb.org/ ISWC 2009], for more information see [[WOP:2009 | the WOP2009 website]]). It will be a full-day workshop consisting of three parts; paper presentations, posters/demos, and “pattern writing” sessions. The poster session will feature both paper posters and pattern posters, i.e. presentations of patterns submitted through [[Ontology_Design_Patterns_._org_(ODP) |''ontologydesignpatterns.org'']]. For the pattern writing session ontology design problems will be submitted and voted for (by the PC and the ODP portal quality committee). The problems considered most interesting will be treated during the workshop, to provide the draft of a solution.

More information about the workshop and CFP will appear very soon!

{{Event
|Name=Odp:WOP2010
|HasStartDate=2010/11/07
|HasEndDate=2010/11/08
}}
{{Submission deadline
|deadline=2010/08/27
|expired=The submission deadline has passed!
|intime=Deadline has not passed, you can still submit to this workshop!
}}

[[Category:Event]]
[[Category:WOP]]

'Ontology Design Patterns':WOP2010

2010-06-22T08:01:33Z

EnricoDaga:

== Welcome to the 2nd Workshop on Ontology Patterns - WOP2010 ==
This is the second edition in a series of yearly workshops addressing the emerging topic of ontology patterns as best practices, related to the [[Ontology_Design_Patterns_._org_(ODP) |''ontologydesignpatterns.org'']] initiative. Patterns need to be shared by a community in order to provide a common language and stimulate pattern usage and development. Hence, the aim of this workshop is twofold; both providing an arena for proposing and discussing good practices, patterns, pattern-based ontologies, systems etc., and broadening the pattern community that will develop its own “language” for discussing and describing relevant problems and their solutions.

The second edition of WOP will be held in conjunction with [http://iswc2010.semanticweb.org/ ISWC 2010] (the first workshop was held in conjunction with [http://iswc2009.semanticweb.org/ ISWC 2009], for more information see [[WOP:2009 | the WOP2009 website]]). It will be a full-day workshop consisting of three parts; paper presentations, posters/demos, and “pattern writing” sessions. The poster session will feature both paper posters and pattern posters, i.e. presentations of patterns submitted through [[Ontology_Design_Patterns_._org_(ODP) |''ontologydesignpatterns.org'']]. For the pattern writing session ontology design problems will be submitted and voted for (by the PC and the ODP portal quality committee). The problems considered most interesting will be treated during the workshop, to provide the draft of a solution.

More information about the workshop and CFP will appear very soon!

{{Event
|Name=Odp:WOP2010
|HasStartDate=2010/11/07
|HasEndDate=2010/11/08
}}
{{Submission deadline
|deadline=2010/08/27
|expired=The submission deadline has passed!
|intime=Deadline has not passed, you can still submit to this workshop!
}}

[[Category:Event]]
[[Category:WOP]]

'Ontology Design Patterns':WOP2010

2010-06-22T08:01:25Z

EnricoDaga:

REDIRECTTO [WOP:2010]
== Welcome to the 2nd Workshop on Ontology Patterns - WOP2010 ==
This is the second edition in a series of yearly workshops addressing the emerging topic of ontology patterns as best practices, related to the [[Ontology_Design_Patterns_._org_(ODP) |''ontologydesignpatterns.org'']] initiative. Patterns need to be shared by a community in order to provide a common language and stimulate pattern usage and development. Hence, the aim of this workshop is twofold; both providing an arena for proposing and discussing good practices, patterns, pattern-based ontologies, systems etc., and broadening the pattern community that will develop its own “language” for discussing and describing relevant problems and their solutions.

The second edition of WOP will be held in conjunction with [http://iswc2010.semanticweb.org/ ISWC 2010] (the first workshop was held in conjunction with [http://iswc2009.semanticweb.org/ ISWC 2009], for more information see [[WOP:2009 | the WOP2009 website]]). It will be a full-day workshop consisting of three parts; paper presentations, posters/demos, and “pattern writing” sessions. The poster session will feature both paper posters and pattern posters, i.e. presentations of patterns submitted through [[Ontology_Design_Patterns_._org_(ODP) |''ontologydesignpatterns.org'']]. For the pattern writing session ontology design problems will be submitted and voted for (by the PC and the ODP portal quality committee). The problems considered most interesting will be treated during the workshop, to provide the draft of a solution.

More information about the workshop and CFP will appear very soon!

{{Event
|Name=Odp:WOP2010
|HasStartDate=2010/11/07
|HasEndDate=2010/11/08
}}
{{Submission deadline
|deadline=2010/08/27
|expired=The submission deadline has passed!
|intime=Deadline has not passed, you can still submit to this workshop!
}}

[[Category:Event]]
[[Category:WOP]]

'Ontology Design Patterns':WOP2010

2010-06-22T08:01:15Z

EnricoDaga:

REDIRECT [WOP:2010]
== Welcome to the 2nd Workshop on Ontology Patterns - WOP2010 ==
This is the second edition in a series of yearly workshops addressing the emerging topic of ontology patterns as best practices, related to the [[Ontology_Design_Patterns_._org_(ODP) |''ontologydesignpatterns.org'']] initiative. Patterns need to be shared by a community in order to provide a common language and stimulate pattern usage and development. Hence, the aim of this workshop is twofold; both providing an arena for proposing and discussing good practices, patterns, pattern-based ontologies, systems etc., and broadening the pattern community that will develop its own “language” for discussing and describing relevant problems and their solutions.

The second edition of WOP will be held in conjunction with [http://iswc2010.semanticweb.org/ ISWC 2010] (the first workshop was held in conjunction with [http://iswc2009.semanticweb.org/ ISWC 2009], for more information see [[WOP:2009 | the WOP2009 website]]). It will be a full-day workshop consisting of three parts; paper presentations, posters/demos, and “pattern writing” sessions. The poster session will feature both paper posters and pattern posters, i.e. presentations of patterns submitted through [[Ontology_Design_Patterns_._org_(ODP) |''ontologydesignpatterns.org'']]. For the pattern writing session ontology design problems will be submitted and voted for (by the PC and the ODP portal quality committee). The problems considered most interesting will be treated during the workshop, to provide the draft of a solution.

More information about the workshop and CFP will appear very soon!

{{Event
|Name=Odp:WOP2010
|HasStartDate=2010/11/07
|HasEndDate=2010/11/08
}}
{{Submission deadline
|deadline=2010/08/27
|expired=The submission deadline has passed!
|intime=Deadline has not passed, you can still submit to this workshop!
}}

[[Category:Event]]
[[Category:WOP]]

WOP:2010

2010-05-31T08:32:46Z

EnricoDaga:

Under construction

WOP:2009/Submission

2010-05-31T08:31:22Z

EnricoDaga: Text replace - 'WOP2009:Main' to 'WOP:2009'

== Paper and Poster Submissions ==
We invite the submission of original research results related to the focus areas of the workshop. Research papers should present mature work and document established results. Poster papers may present work-in-progress (e.g. position papers), presentations of implemented systems, preliminary results of issues still under development, and other kinds of results suitable presentation in a poster format.

'''Submission guidelines'''
* Research papers should be no longer than 14 pages, following the Springer LNCS formatting style (see [http://www.springer.com/computer/lncs?SGWID=0-164-2-72376-0 LNCS style templates]). Note that papers not adhering to the style guidelines or the maximum page limit will be rejected without review.
* Poster papers should be no longer than 7 pages, following the same style as the research papers.
* Submissions should be in English, and non-native speakers are encouraged to seek assistance from native English speakers to ensure a correct language.
* Submission of the papers should be done through the EasyChair conference site, available at http://www.easychair.org/conferences/?conf=wop2009

'''Process'''
* Each submission will be reviewed by at least two members of the PC (in case of disagreement a third reviewer will be assigned).
* The final decision will be made by the paper/poster chair, based on the reviews.
* The following criteria will be specifically taken into consideration:
** utility and applicability of the approach/pattern/system described,
** contribution of the paper to the research community,
** originality of the approach,
** relevance of the topic and findings to the workshop subjects,
** quality of the research process,
** and quality of the writing.
* Accepted papers/posters will be required to address the comments of the reviewers in the camera ready version.
* At least one author of each paper must register for, and attend, the workshop to present the paper/poster.

'''Important dates for paper and poster submission'''
* Research paper and poster paper submission deadline '''*EXTENDED*''' - '''August 21''' (11:59pm CET)
* Paper/poster notification of acceptance - '''September 14'''
* Camera ready deadline - '''September 26'''
* Online proceedings published - '''October 9'''
* Workshop date - '''October 25'''

== Pattern Submissions ==
We invite the submission of research results in the form of ontology design patterns (ODPs). Patterns submitted should have a general relevance to the ontology engineering field, or specific interest within a knowledge domain. Patterns should solve some particular problem, and be of significant interest for discussion at the workshop. Patterns should be original, in the sense that they are the intellectual product of the author, however they may still be based on the collective experience of a community. Note that a criteria for acceptance is whether a pattern would constitute a good basis for discussion at the workshop, hence submitting a "perfect" but non-controversial pattern could in principle result in certification of the pattern but a rejection for discussion at the workshop. Patterns submitted can be accompanied by a paper/poster submission, but these will be treated independently, i.e. they will not be reviewed together and the decision for one submission will not affect the other.

'''Submission guidelines'''
* Patterns should be of one of the following five categories:
** Logical ODPs
** Architectural ODPs
** Content ODPs
** Re-engineering ODPs
** Alignment ODPs
* Patterns must be fully annotated, using the templates provided in the portal for each category.
* Submit the pattern through the [[Submissions:SubmitAPattern | ODP submission for the specific pattern type]] and don't forget to tell us that you are submitting for WOP'09 (i.e. when you edit the pattern page, write WOP2009 in the "event" field).

'''Process'''
* Each submission will be reviewed by at least two members of the PC or the ODP portal Quality Committee (in case of disagreement a third reviewer will be assigned)
* The final decision will be made by the pattern chairs, based on the reviews.
* The following criteria will be specifically taken into consideration:
** the practical utility and reusability of the pattern by a community,
** the relevance of the problem addressed by the pattern,
** if the pattern encodes some best practice within a community,
** and whether the pattern presents a problem suitable for discussion and the workshop.
* When a pattern is accepted the authors are also required to describe the pattern in an extended abstract (formatting instructions - see regular papers), of maximum 4 pages. The extended abstract must be submitted before the camera ready deadline of papers, and will be included in the online proceedings.
* Accepted patterns will be assigned an advisor (a member of the PC or the ODP Quality Committee) who will discuss the reviews and the pattern with the author, and assist the revision of the pattern by proposing necessary changes and updates before the final upload (deadline see below).
* At least one pattern author must register for, and attend, the workshop to present and discuss the pattern.
* At the workshop each pattern will be given a time slot for discussion, including the following parts:
** A brief presentation of the pattern by the author.
** An overview of the discussion (reviews and subsequent updates), presented by the advisor, who also indicates main points of interest, main merits and weaknesses of the pattern, and initiates the discussion with the author.
** The audience participates in the discussion and specific focus is given to possible improvements to the pattern.
* After the workshop the author is given a second opportunity to improve the pattern, thereafter the pattern may be proposed for certification and inclusion in the ODP official catalogue.

'''Important dates for pattern submission'''
* Pattern submission deadline '''*EXTENDED*''' - '''August 21''' (11:59pm CET)
* Pattern notification of acceptance - '''September 14'''
* Submission of extended abstract - '''September 26'''
* Upload of revised pattern - '''October 9'''
* Workshop date - '''October 25'''

'''Current list of received pattern submissions'''
{{#ask: [[Category: OntologyDesignPattern]] [[SubmittedToEvent::WOP:2009]]
| ?HasIntent
}}

[[Category:WOP2009]]

Submissions:Xsd:sequence embedding

2010-05-31T08:31:19Z

EnricoDaga: Text replace - 'WOP2009:Main' to 'WOP:2009'

{{Reengineering_OP_Proposal_toolbar}}
{{Reengineering OP Proposal General Information Template
|Name=Structural XML/DTD embedding to ontological meronymy
|Problem=This pattern addresses the re-engineering of certain embedded structures within XSD and DTD representations into a meronymic pattern.
}}
{{Reengineering OP Proposal NOR Template
|Description=*For a description of XSD see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XML_Schema_(W3C)
The pattern covers the cases where an xsd:element is embedded into an xsd:sequence, which is in its turn embedded by an xsd:element.
*The graphical representation only illustrates the XSD case.
*The DTD case is described in the example section.
|Graphical Representation=1.JPG
}}
{{Reengineering OP Proposal Ontology Template
|Description=The ontology comprising the pattern representing the relevant XSD or DTD fragment.
|Graphical Representation=Xsd-embedding2.JPG
}}
{{Reengineering OP Proposal Process Template
|Description=The re-engineering process involves a number of steps:
*The creation of embedding class and embedded class(es)
*The creation of an instance of the hasPart object property from the DOLCE Ultra Light ontology (http://www.ontologydesignpatterns.org/ont/dul/DUL.owl) with embedding class as domain and embedded class(es) as range.
|Graphical Representation=Xsd-step3.png
}}
{{Reengineering OP Proposal Scenario Example Template
|Description=The application scenario is in the area of the modelling of lexical translational equivalence according to the format of the XLIFF and TMX standards for translation memory.
}}
{{Reengineering OP Proposal NOR Example Template
|Description=XLIFF
The purpose of the OASIS XLIFF standard (http://docs.oasis-open.org/xliff/v1.2/os/xliff-core.html) is to define and promote, through extensible XML vocabularies, the adoption of a specification for the interchange of localizable software and document based objects and related metadata.
XLIFF should be able to mark-up and capture localization information and interoperate with different processes and phases without loss of information. It should fulfill specific requirements of being tool-neutral. It should support the localization related aspects of internationalization and entire localization process. It also needs to support common software and content data formats. This should also provide an extensibility mechanism to allow the development of tools compatible with an implementer’s proprietary data formats and workflow requirements.

*1. TransUnit: contains (a set of) translational equivalences
*2. Source: the source of the translation pair
*3. SegSource: the translatable text, divided into segments
*4. Mrk: Each segment is marked by means of the <Mrk> element with attribute “mType” set to the value "seg".
*5. Target: the target of the translation pair
*6. Alt-Trans: possible translations as Target instances
*7. Equiv-trans: Indicates if the target language translation is a direct equivalent of the source text.

DTD embedding is exemplified (but not illustrated on this page) by Translation Memory eXchange standard (TMX) (http://www.lisa.org/Translation-Memory-e.34.0.html). TMX is the vendor-neutral open XML standard for the exchange of Translation Memory data created by Computer Aided Translation and localization tools. The purpose of TMX is to allow easier exchange of translation memory data between tools and/or translation vendors with little or no loss of critical data during the process. In existence since 1998, TMX is a certifiable standard format. TMX is developed and maintained by OSCAR (Open Standards for Container/Content Allowing Re-use), a LISA (Localization Industry Standards Association) Special Interest Group.
The following structure from TMX illustrates the same pattern conversion

<!ELEMENT tu (tuv+) >
This describes that a translation unit (tu) consists of one or more translation unit variants (tuv).
A translationUnit contains the data for a given translation unit.
A TranslationUnitVariant specifies text in a given language.
A more detailed description of TMX can be found in NeOn deliverable D2.4.3: Multilingual and Localization Support for Ontologies (www.neon-project.org).
|Graphical Representation=xsd-step4.png
|Web Reference=http://schemas.liquid-technologies.com/Oasis/XLIFF/1.2/default.html?url=http://schemas.liquid-technologies.com/Oasis/XLIFF/1.2/xliff-core-1_2-strict_xsd.html
}}
{{Reengineering OP Proposal Ontology Example Template
|Description=The xsd:sequence embedding pattern as the resulting ontology pattern.
|Graphical Representation=xsd-step5.JPG
|Web Reference=http://gate.ac.uk/gate-extras/neon/ontologies/xsd-embedding.owl
}}
{{Reengineering OP Proposal Process Example Template
|Description=The ontological pattern re-engineered from the XLIFF fragment.
|Graphical Representation=Xsd-embedding-6.png
}}
{{Reengineering OP Proposal Additional Information Template
|SubmittedBy=Wim Peters
|Author=Wim Peters
}}

{{Scenarios about me}}
{{Reviews about me}}{{Modeling issues about me}}
{{Submission to event
|Event=WOP:2009
}}

2010-05-31T08:30:43Z

EnricoDaga: Text replace - 'WOP2009:Main' to 'WOP:2009'

{{Reengineering_OP_Proposal_toolbar}}
{{Reengineering OP Proposal General Information Template
|Name=Term-based – record-based model - thesaurus to lightweight ontology
|Problem=Re-engineering a term-based thesaurus which follows the record-based
model to design a lightweight ontology.

APPLICABILITY

The semantics of the relation between narrower and broader terms are subClassOf.
}}
{{Reengineering OP Proposal NOR Template
|Description=A non-ontological resource holds a term-based thesaurus which follows the record-based model.
A thesaurus represents the knowledge of a domain with a collection of terms and a limited set of relations between them.
The record-based data model is a denormalized structure, uses a record for every term with the information about the term, such as synonyms, broader, narrower and related terms.
|Graphical Representation=recordbasedtermbased.png
}}
{{Reengineering OP Proposal Ontology Template
|Description=The generated ontology will be based on the lightweight ontology architectural pattern (AP-LW-01). Each thesaurus term is mapped to a class. A subClassOf relation is defined between the new classes for the BT/NT relation. A relatedClass relation is defined between the new classes for the RT relation. For the UF/USE relations the SynonymOrEquivalence (SOE) pattern is applied.
|Graphical Representation=recordbasedtermbasedOntologycheck.png
}}
{{Reengineering OP Proposal Process Template
|Description=1. Identify the records which contain thesaurus terms without a broader term.

2. For each one of the above identified thesaurus terms ti:

2.1. Create the corresponding ontology class, Ci class, if it is not created yet.

2.2. Identify the thesaurus term, tj , which are narrower terms of ti. They are referenced
in the same record which contains ti.

2.3. For each one of the above identified thesaurus term tj :

2.3.1. Create the corresponding ontology class, Cj class, if it is not created yet.

2.3.2. Set up the subClassOf relation between Cj and Ci

2.3.3. Repeat from step 2.2 for cj as a new ci

2.4. Identify the thesaurus term, tr, which are related terms of ti. They are referenced
in the same record which contains ti.

2.5. For each one of the above identified thesaurus term tr:

2.5.1. Create the corresponding ontology class, Cr class, if it is not created yet.

2.5.2. Set up the relatedClass relation between Cr and Ci

2.5.3. Repeat from step 2.4 for cr as a new ci

2.6. Identify the thesaurus term, tq, which are equivalent terms of ti. They are
referenced in the same record which contains ti.

2.7. For each one of the above identified thesaurus term tq:

2.7.1. Apply the SynonymOrEquivalence (SOE) pattern.
|Graphical Representation=wfthbrblocheck.png
}}
{{Reengineering OP Proposal Scenario Example Template
|Description=Suppose that someone wants to build a lightweight ontology based on the European Training
Thesaurus (ETT), which is a term-based thesaurus and it follows the record-based model.
}}
{{Reengineering OP Proposal NOR Example Template
|Description=The European Training Thesaurus (ETT) constitutes the controlled vocabulary of reference
in the field of vocational education and training (VET) in Europe.
The relation semantics between the sub-ordinate and the super-ordinate concepts is
subClassOf.
|Graphical Representation=recordbasedtermbasedexample.png
|Web Reference=http://libserver.cedefop.europa.eu/ett/en/
}}
{{Reengineering OP Proposal Ontology Example Template
|Description=The generated ontology will be based on the lightweight ontology architectural pattern (AP-LW-01). Each thesaurus term is mapped to a class. A subClassOf relation is defined between the new classes for the BT/NT relation. A relatedClass relation is defined between the new classes for the RT relation. For the UF/USE relations the SynonymOrEquivalence (SOE) pattern Is applied.
|Graphical Representation=recordbasedtermbasedOntologyETTcheck.png
}}
{{Reengineering OP Proposal Process Example Template
|Description=1. Create the learning class and the personal development class.

2. Create the competence class and assert that competence is subClassOf
learning.

3. Create the performance class and assert that performance is subClassOf
development.

4. Assert that achievement is label of the performance class.

5. Assert that competence is relatedClass of performance.

6. Create the learning class and assert that learning is equivalentClass of
competence.

6.1. Create the efficiency class and assert that efficiency is subClassOf
performance.

6.2. Create the failure class and assert that failure is subClassOf
performance.

6.3. Create the success class and assert that success is subClassOf
performance.
|Graphical Representation=wfthtbrbloexamplecheck.png
}}
{{Reengineering OP Proposal Additional Information Template
|SubmittedBy=Boris Villazón Terrazas,
|Author=Boris Villazón Terrazas
|Related to=Use the Architectural Pattern: TX-AP-01
}}
{{Additional information header}}
[[Category:Review assigned]]
{{Scenarios about me}}
{{Reviews about me}}
{{Modeling issues about me}}
{{My references}}
{{Submission to event
|Event=WOP:2009
}}

Submissions:SynonymOrEquivalence (SOE)

2010-05-31T08:30:20Z

EnricoDaga: Text replace - 'WOP2009:Main' to 'WOP:2009'

{{Logical_OP_Proposal_toolbar}}
{{Graphical representation header}}
{{Graphical representation
|ImageName=[[Image:AntipatternSOE.jpg]]
}}
{{Logical OP General Template
|Name=SynonymOrEquivalence (SOE)
|SubmittedBy=Catherine Roussey, Oscar Corcho
}}
{{Logical OP Description Template
|Motivation=We have identified a set of patterns that are commonly used by domain experts in their DL formalisations and OWL implementations, and that normally result in unsatisfiable classes or modelling errors. As aforementioned all these antipatterns come from a misuse and misunderstanding of DL expressions by ontology developers. Thus they are all Logical AntiPatterns (LAP): they are independent from a specific domain of interest, but dependent on the expressivity of the logical formalism used for the representation. We have categorized them into three groups:
|Aim=The ontology developer wants to express that two classes C1 and C2 are identical. This is not very useful in a single ontology that does not import others. Indeed, what the ontology developer generally wants to represent is a terminological synonymy relation: the class C1 has two labels: C1 and C2. Usually one of the classes is not used anywhere else in the axioms defined in the ontology.
|Solution=C1 isEquivalentTo C2
The proposal for avoiding this antipattern is the following (if C2 is the less used term in the ontology) add all the comments and labels of C2 into C1 and remove C2
}}
{{Logical OP Example Template
|ProblemExample=Subterranean_Watercourses isEquivalentTo Subterranean_Rivers
see Corriente_Subterranea concept in Hydrontology
|SolutionExample=http://www.dia.fi.upm.es/~ocorcho/OWLDebugging/
}}
{{Logical OP Reference Template}}
{{Additional information header}}
[[Category:Review assigned]]
{{Scenarios about me}}
{{Reviews about me}}
{{Modeling issues about me}}
{{My references}}
{{Submission to event
|Event=WOP:2009
}}

Submissions:Partition

2010-05-31T08:29:54Z

EnricoDaga: Text replace - 'WOP2009:Main' to 'WOP:2009'

{{Logical_OP_Proposal_toolbar}}
{{Graphical representation header}}
{{Graphical representation
|ImageName=Partition-diagram.png
}}
{{Logical OP General Template
|Name=Partition
|SubmittedBy=OlafNoppens
}}
{{Logical OP Description Template
|Motivation=The Partition Pattern is a logical pattern that introduces axioms which model a partition of concepts. A partition is a general structure which is divided into several disjoint parts. With respect to ontologies the structure is a concept which is divided into several pair-wise disjoint concepts. This pattern reflects the simplest case where a named concept is defined as a partition of concepts.
|Aim=The Partition Pattern describes how to model a partition, i.e., a named concept which is divided into several disjoint concepts. Applying this pattern to an ontology will introduce the necessary axioms.
|Solution=Let ''P'' be a named concept that is the partition which is divided into several concepts ''C_i''. Then the partition is defined by introducing the following axioms (expressed in KRSS [1]):

''(define-concept P (or C0 C1 ... Cn) )''
''(disjoint Ci Cj)'' ( 0 ≤ i,j ≤ n, i ≠ j ).

Here ''(disjoint C_i C_j)''a placeholder for the pair-wise disjointness of all ''C_i''. Note that ''C_i'' can also be arbitrary concept expressions (even if this is not allowed in the original KRSS syntax).

In OWL 2 [2] the axioms can be expressed as follows (using OWL 2 Abstract Syntax):

''EquivalentClasses(P, ObjectUnionOf(C1, ..., Cn))''

''DisjointClasses(C1, ..., Cn)''

[1] Patel-Schneider, P. F., Swartout, B.: Description-Logic Knowledge Representation System Specification, 1993

[2] Motik, B., Patel-Schneider, P. F., Parsia, B.: OWL 2 Structural Specification and Functional-Style Syntax. W3C Candidate Recommendation 11 June 2009.
}}
{{Logical OP Example Template
|ProblemExample=In an ontology about family relationship we deﬁned concepts such as ''Person'',
''Aunt'' and ''ParentOfSon'' which are characterized by a relationships such as ''hasChild''(resp. the inverse relationship ''hasParent''), ''hasSibling'', '
''married-with'' as well as by the gender of people (''Male'' respectively ''Female''). There are a lot of similar ontologies about family relationships.

''EquivalentClasses(Parent-Of-Son ''ObjectSomeValuesFrom (has-Child Male) )''
''EquivalentClasses(Parent-Of-Daughter ''ObjectSomeValuesFrom(has-Child Female) )''
''EquivalentClasses(Aunt ObjectIntersectionOf(Uncle-Or-Aunt Female))''
''EquivalentClasses(Uncle-Or-Aunt ObjectIntersectionOf(Person ObjectSomeValuesFrom(has-Sibling Parent)))''

The concept ''Gender'' is partitioned in ''Male'' and ''Female''. Applying this pattern results in the following axioms:

''EquivalentClasses(Gender, ObjectUnionOf(Male Female)) ''
''DisjointClasses(Male Female)''
|SolutionExample=http://www.informatik.uni-ulm.de/ki/Noppens/generation.owl
}}
{{Logical OP Reference Template}}
{{Takes in account review
|TakesInAccountReview=http://ontologydesignpatterns.org/wiki/Reviews:MartaSabou_about_Partition
}}
{{Takes in account review
|TakesInAccountReview=http://ontologydesignpatterns.org/wiki/Reviews:HenrikEriksson_about_Partition
}}
{{Takes in account review
|TakesInAccountReview=http://ontologydesignpatterns.org/wiki/Reviews:LuigiIannone_about_Partition_2
}}
{{Additional information header}}

{{Scenarios about me}}
{{Reviews about me}}
{{Modeling issues about me}}
{{My references}}
{{Submission to event
|Event=WOP:2009
}}

Submissions:OnlynessIsLoneliness (OIL)

2010-05-31T08:29:53Z

EnricoDaga: Text replace - 'WOP2009:Main' to 'WOP:2009'

{{Logical_OP_Proposal_toolbar}}
{{Graphical representation header}}
{{Graphical representation
|ImageName=[[Media:AntipatternOIL.JPG]]
}}
{{Logical OP General Template
|Name=OnlynessIsLoneliness
|SubmittedBy=Catherine Roussey, Oscar Corcho
|AlsoKnownAs=OIL
|Author=Catherine Roussey, Oscar Corcho
}}
{{Logical OP Description Template
|Motivation=Our work is based on the debugging process of real ontologies that have been developed by domain experts, who are not necessarily too familiar with DL, and hence can misuse DL constructors and misunderstand the semantics of some OWL expressions, leading to unwanted unsatisfiable classes. Our patterns were first found during the debugging process of a medium-sized OWL ontology (165 classes) developed by a domain expert in the area of hydrology called HydrOntology. The first version of this ontology had a total of 114 unsatisfiable classes. The information provided by the debugging systems used on (root) unsatisfiable classes was not easily understandable by domain experts to find the reasons for their unsatisfiability. And in several occasions during the debugging process the generation of justifications for unsatisfiability took several hours, what made these tools hard to use. Using this debugging process and several other real ontologies debugging one, we found out that in several occasions domain experts were just changing axioms from the original ontology in a somehow random manner, even changing the intended meaning of the definitions instead of correcting errors in their formalisations.

We have identified a set of patterns that are commonly used by domain experts in their DL formalisations and OWL implementations, and that normally result in unsatisfiable classes or modelling errors. Thus they are antipatterns. A Koenig define antipatterns as patterns that appear obvious but are ineffective or far from optimal in practice, representing worst practice about how to structure and build software. We also have made an effort to identify common alternatives for providing solutions to them, so that they can be used by domain experts to debug their ontologies.

All these antipatterns come from a misuse and misunderstanding of DL expressions by ontology developers. Thus they are all Logical AntiPatterns (LAP): they are independent from a specific domain of interest, but dependent on the expressivity of the logical formalism used for the representation.
|Aim=The ontology developer created a universal restriction to say that C1 instances can only be linked with property R to C2 instances. Next, a new universal restriction is added saying that C1 instances can only be linked with R to C3 instances, with C2 and C3 disjoint. In general, this is because the ontology developer forgot the previous axiom in the same class or in the parent class.
|Solution=C1 subClassOf R only C2; C1 subClassOf R only C3; C2 disjointWith C3

If it makes sense, we propose to the domain expert to transform the two universal restrictions into only one that refers to the disjunction of C2 and C3.

C1 subClassOf R only (C2 or C3); C2 disjointWith C3

other alternative solutions could be:

1) suppress the disjointness axiom.

2) create two sublass of C1 such as: C1.1 subClassOf C1; C1.1 subClassOf R only C2; C1.2 subClassOf C1; C1.2 subClassOf R only C3; C2 disjointWith C3;

3) create C4 such as C4 isEqualTo C2 or C3; C1 subClassOf R only C4; C2 disjointWith C3.

4) create two subproperty of R: R2 subPropertyOf R; R3 subProperty of R; C1 subClassOf R2 only C2; C1 subClassOf R3 only C3; C2 disjointWith C3.
}}
{{Logical OP Example Template
|ProblemExample=Transtitional_Waters subClassOf is_nearby only Sea_Waters; Transitional_Waters subClassOf is_nearby only River_Mouths; River_Mouths disjointWith Sea_Waters

see Aguas_de_Transicion concept in hydrontology.

Wet_Zone subClassOf Wetlands and are_inundated only Sea_Water and are_inundated only Surface_Water and are_inundated min 1 Thing;

see Zona_Humeda concept in hydrontology.
|SolutionExample=http://www.dia.fi.upm.es/~ocorcho/OWLDebugging/
|Consequences=Transtitional_Waters subClassOf is_nearby only (Sea_Waters or River_Mouths); River_Mouths disjointWith Sea_Waters

Wet_Zone subClassOf Wetlands and are_inundated only (Sea_Water or Surface_Water) and are_inundated min 1 Thing;
}}
{{Logical OP Reference Template}}
{{Additional information header}}
[[Category:Review assigned]]
{{Scenarios about me}}
{{Reviews about me}}
{{Modeling issues about me}}
{{My references}}
{{Submission to event
|Event=WOP:2009
}}

Submissions:NegativePropertyAssertions

2010-05-31T08:29:25Z

EnricoDaga: Text replace - 'WOP2009:Main' to 'WOP:2009'

{{Logical_OP_Proposal_toolbar}}
{{Graphical representation header}}
{{Graphical representation
|ImageName=Npa-diagram.png
}}
{{Logical OP General Template
|Name=NegativePropertyAssertions
|SubmittedBy=OlafNoppens,
}}
{{Logical OP Description Template
|Motivation=The motivation of this pattern is to model ''negative property assertions'' (NPAs) in ontology languages such as OWL 1 [1] that do not provide a special constructor for expressing it. It is worth mentioning that not all knowledge base systems can be migrated to OWL 2 [2] for several reasons. On the other hand, NPAs modeled according to this pattern can be migrated to OWL 2 using the newly introduced constructor.
A negative property assertion as defined in the upcoming OWL 2 states that a given individual ''i'' is never connected to a given individual ''j'' by a given property expression ''P''. In other words, asserting that ''i'' is connected to ''j'' by ''P'' results in an inconsistent ontology. In this sense this assertion can be considered as a constraint that should not be violated. In contrast, considering an ontology where it cannot be inferred that ''i'' is connected to ''j'' by ''P'' does not necessarily mean that there cannot be such a connection - in fact, it is merely not modeled.

[1] Patel-Schneider, P.F., Hayes, P., Horrocks, I.: OWL Web Ontology Language
Semantics and Abstract Syntax, W3C Recommendation 10 February 2004.

[2] Motik, B., Patel-Schneider, P.F., Parsia, B.: OWL 2 Structural Speciﬁcation and Functional-Style Syntax. W3C Candidate Recommendation 11 June 2009, 2009.
|Aim=Expressing NPAs in ontologies prior to OWL 2 as well as given an transformation rule when using OWL 2.
|Solution=NegativeObjectPropertyAssertion(prop i1 i2) is equivalent to (using OWL 2 Abstract Syntax):

SubClassOf(ObjectOneOf(i1), ObjectComplementOf(ObjectSomeValuesFrom(prop, ObjectOneOf(i2))))

Let ''C'' and ''D'' be concepts. Then ''C'' and ''D'' are disjoint if, and only if, ''C'' is subsumed by the complement of ''D'', i.e., '(
SubClassOf( C ObjectComplementOf(D) ).

The equivalence is correct because of the duality of disjointness, equivalence, and unsatisfiability: ''C'' is subsumed by ''D'' if, and only if,
ObjectIntersectionOf( C ObjectComplementOf(D) ) is unsatisfiable, and the intersection of ''C'' and ''D'' is unsatisfiable if, and only if, ''C' and ''D'' are disjoint.

One also reminds that the extension of the concept
ObjectSomeValuesFrom(prop C) is the set of individuals ''i'' which are connected to an individual ''j'' that is in the extension of the concept ''C'', by the property ''prop''.

Let ''NegativePropertyAssertion(p a b)'' be a negative property assertion axiom, i.e., the individual ''a'' is not related to ''b'' by the property ''p''. Then the extension of
''ObjectSomeValuesFrom( p ObjectOneOf(b) )'' which contain all individuals that are connected to ''b'' by ''p'' must not contain ''a''. This is true, if, and only if ''ObjectOneOf(a)'' is disjoint to ObjectSomeValuesFrom( p ObjectOneOf(b) )''
|Elements=Individiual i1

Individual i2

ObjectProperty prop
}}
{{Logical OP Example Template
|ProblemExample=Consider a social network containing facts about people and their relationships.
Let ''Adam'' and ''Eve'' be two persons and like a property (''A likes B''). Furthermore we know that ''Adam'' does not like ''Eve'' but we have no dislike relationship. Moreover, our language (such as OWL 1) does not have any NPA axiom constructor.
The sample ontology is interpreted with respect to the open-world semantics,
i. e. , one can not infer the dislike merely from the lack of a property assertion axiom ''ObjectPropertyAssertion(like Adam Eve)''. Then this fact can be expressed with the following axiom (we will also use the OWL 2 Abstract Syntax here):

''SubClassOf (Adam ComplementOf(ObjectSomeValuesFrom( likes ObjectOneOf(Eve))))''
}}
{{Logical OP Reference Template}}
{{Additional information header}}
[[Category:Review assigned]]
{{Scenarios about me}}
{{Reviews about me}}
{{Modeling issues about me}}
{{My references}}
{{Submission to event
|Event=WOP:2009
}}

Submissions:DisjointnessOfComplement (DOC)

2010-05-31T08:29:16Z

EnricoDaga: Text replace - 'WOP2009:Main' to 'WOP:2009'

{{Logical_OP_Proposal_toolbar}}
{{Graphical representation header}}
{{Graphical representation}}
{{Logical OP General Template
|Name=DisjointnessOfComplement (DOC)
|SubmittedBy=CatherineRoussey, OscarCorcho,
}}
{{Logical OP Description Template
|Motivation=We have identified a set of patterns that are commonly used by domain experts in their DL formalisations and OWL implementations, and that normally result in unsatisfiable classes or modelling errors. As aforementioned all these antipatterns come from a misuse and misunderstanding of DL expressions by ontology developers. Thus they are all Logical AntiPatterns (LAP): they are independent from a specific domain of interest, but dependent on the expressivity of the logical formalism used for the representation.
|Aim=The ontology developer may want to say that C1 and C2 cannot share instances, instead of defining C1 as the logical negation of C2. Hence it could be more appropriate to state that C1 and C2 are disjoint.
|Solution=C1 isEquivalentTo not C2
should be replace by
C1 disjointWith C2
}}
{{Logical OP Example Template
|ProblemExample=Salt_Lagoon isEquivalentTo not Fresh_Waters
see concept Laguna_Salada in Hydrontology
|SolutionExample=http://www.dia.fi.upm.es/~ocorcho/OWLDebugging/
}}
{{Logical OP Reference Template}}
{{Additional information header}}
[[Category:Review assigned]]
{{Scenarios about me}}
{{Reviews about me}}
{{Modeling issues about me}}
{{My references}}
{{Submission to event
|Event=WOP:2009
}}

Submissions:Enlarge Class Definition for Resolving Disjointness due to Subsomption

2010-05-31T08:29:16Z

EnricoDaga: Text replace - 'WOP2009:Main' to 'WOP:2009'

{{Logical_OP_Proposal_toolbar}}
{{Graphical representation header}}
{{Graphical representation
|ImageName=Djedidi_LOP2_WOP09.pdf
}}
{{Logical OP General Template
|Name=Enlarge Class Definition for Resolving Disjointness due to Subsumption.
|SubmittedBy=RimDjedidi
|Author=Rim DJEDIDI
}}
{{Logical OP Description Template
|Motivation=Problem :

This pattern helps resolving a logical inconsistency triggered by a situation of disjoint classes subsuming a common sub-class. When we need to define – for some modeling issues related to domain of interest – a class as a sub-class of two disjoint classes, a disjointness inconsistency is caused. The problem can be illustrated by the following scenario: let’s consider a class Sub_Class defined as a sub-class of a class Disjoint_Class 2; and a class Disjoint_Class 1 disjoint with the Disjoint_Class 2 (see diagram in attached file). If we need to add a sub-class relation between the Sub_Class and the Disjoint_Class 1, this generates a disjointness inconsistency:

- If the extension of the Sub_Class contains individuals instantiating this sub-class, the logical inconsistency will be extended to the knowledge base; - If the Sub_Class is not instantiated to individuals, it will be diagnosed as an unsatisfiable class.

To solve this inconsistency, one can think about deleting the disjointness axiom. However, this can alter the semantics expressed in the ontology, and negatively affect consistency checking and automatic evaluation of existing individuals as explained in [1]. This pattern tackles the questions of how to resolve the inconsistency caused by such kind of subsumption while preserving existing knowledge.

[1] Völker, J., Vrandecic, D., Sure, Y., Hotho, A.: Learning Disjointness. In F., Enrico, K., Michael, May. Wolfgang (Eds.). Proceedings of the 4th European Semantic Web Conference, ESWC 2007. LNCS: Vol. 4519 pp: 175-189. (2007)
|Aim=Intent: The purpose of this pattern is to support the semantics of a subsumption defined under two disjoint classes and resolve the resulting inconsistency.

Covered Requirements: The pattern solves a problem of disjointness inconsistency caused by a subsumption relation without deleting the disjointness axiom so that existing knowledge can be preserved.
|Solution=The pattern resolves a disjointness inconsistency –caused by a subsumption– by enlarging the definition of the sub-class object of the disjointness inconsistency, based on the definition of the involved disjoint classes. The definition of the sub-class is enlarged by the union (OR) of the definitions of the disjoint classes.

The application of the solution can be described by the following process (see diagram in attached file):
1) The pattern enlarges the definition of the sub-class object of the disjointness inconsistency by defining –in its description– a union of the definitions of the disjoint classes involved in the inconsistency to be resolved.
|Elements=the following elements are manipulated by the pattern:

ID of the sub-class to enlarge (Sub_Class).
ID of the first disjoint class (Disjoint_Class 1).
ID of the second disjoint class (Disjoint_Class 2).
}}
{{Logical OP Example Template
|ProblemExample=Let’s consider the OWL ontology O defined by the following axioms:

{Animal ⊑Fauna-Flora, Plant ⊑Fauna-Flora, Carnivorous-Plant ⊑Plant, Plant ⊑ Not(Animal)}

If we apply a change to the ontology defining Carnivorous-Plant class as a sub-class of the class Animal, we cause a disjointness inconsistency. The proposed pattern resolves this kind of inconsistency.
|Consequences=The application of the pattern to resolve the example above is performed as follow:
1) The pattern enlarges the definition of the sub-class object of the disjointness inconsistency Carnivorous-Plant by defining –in its description– a union of the definitions of the disjoint classes involved in the inconsistency: the classes Animal and Plant.
}}
{{Logical OP Reference Template
|KnownUse=This pattern is proposed as another solution to the problem solved by the Logical OP "Define Hybrid Class Resolving Disjointness due to Subsumption"
}}
{{Additional information header}}
[[Category:Review assigned]]
{{Scenarios about me}}
{{Reviews about me}}
{{Modeling issues about me}}
{{My references}}
{{Submission to event
|Event=WOP:2009
}}

Submissions:Define Hybrid Class Resolving Disjointness due to Subsumption

2010-05-31T08:29:10Z

EnricoDaga: Text replace - 'WOP2009:Main' to 'WOP:2009'

{{Logical_OP_Proposal_toolbar}}
{{Graphical representation header}}
{{Graphical representation
|ImageName=Djedidi_LOP1_WOP09.pdf
}}
{{Logical OP General Template
|Name=Define Hybrid Class Resolving Disjointness due to Subsumption
|SubmittedBy=RimDjedidi
|Author=Rim Djedidi, Marie-Aude Aufaure
}}
{{Logical OP Description Template
|Motivation=Problem :
This pattern helps resolving a logical inconsistency triggered by a situation of disjoint classes subsuming a common sub-class. When we need to define – for some modeling issues related to domain of interest – a class as a sub-class of two disjoint classes, a disjointness inconsistency is caused.
The problem can be illustrated by the following scenario: let’s consider a class Sub_Class defined as a sub-class of a class Disjoint_Class 2; and a class Disjoint_Class 1 disjoint with the Disjoint_Class 2 (see diagram in attached file). If we need to add a sub-class relation between the Sub_Class and the Disjoint_Class 1, this generates a disjointness inconsistency:

- If the extension of the Sub_Class contains individuals instantiating this sub-class, the logical inconsistency will be extended to the knowledge base;
- If the Sub_Class is not instantiated to individuals, it will be diagnosed as an unsatisfiable class.

To solve this inconsistency, one can think about deleting the disjointness axiom. However, this can alter the semantics expressed in the ontology, and negatively affect consistency checking and automatic evaluation of existing individuals as explained in [1].
This pattern tackles the questions of how to resolve the inconsistency caused by such kind of subsumption while preserving existing knowledge.

[1] Völker, J., Vrandecic, D., Sure, Y., Hotho, A.: Learning Disjointness. In F., Enrico, K., Michael, May. Wolfgang (Eds.). Proceedings of the 4th European Semantic Web Conference, ESWC 2007. LNCS: Vol. 4519 pp: 175-189. (2007)
|Aim=Intent: The purpose of this pattern is to support the semantics of a subsumption defined under two disjoint classes and resolve the resulting inconsistency.

Covered Requirements: The pattern solves a problem of disjointness inconsistency caused by a subsumption relation without deleting the disjointness axiom so that existing knowledge can be preserved.
|Solution=The pattern resolves a disjointness inconsistency –due to a subsumption–by defining a Hybrid Class based on the definition of disjoint classes implicated in the inconsistency; and redistributing correctly sub-class relations between the sub-class, the hybrid class, and the most specific common super-class of the disjoint classes implicated. The definition of the Hybrid Class is the union (OR) of the definitions of the disjoint classes.
The application of the solution can be described by the following process (see diagram in attached file):

1.The pattern defines a Hybrid Class as a union of the definitions of the disjoint classes implicated in the inconsistency to be resolved;
2.The pattern defines a subsumption between the most specific common super-class of the disjoint classes implicated in the inconsistency, and the Hybrid Class created;
3.The pattern defines a subsumption between the Hybrid Class and the sub-class involved in the inconsistency.

Consequences: The application of the pattern resolves the disjointness inconsistency (even if the involved sub-class is instantiated by individuals) and preserves existing knowledge. As a Logical OP, this pattern is independent from a specific domain of interest. However, it depends on the expressivity of the logical formalism used for the representation of the ontology. Therefore, the language of the targeted ontology should allow expressing class union.
|Elements=The following elements are manipulated by the pattern:
ID of the sub-class (Sub_Class).
ID of the first disjoint class (Disjoint_Class 1).
ID of the second disjoint class (Disjoint_Class 2).
ID of the most specific common super-class of the disjoint classes involved (Common_Super_Class).
}}
{{Logical OP Example Template
|ProblemExample=Let’s consider the OWL ontology O defined by the following axioms:
{Animal ⊑Fauna-Flora, Plant ⊑Fauna-Flora, Carnivorous-Plant ⊑Plant, Plant ⊑ Not(Animal)}

If we apply a change to the ontology defining Carnivorous-Plant class as a sub-class of the class Animal, we cause a disjointness inconsistency. The proposed pattern resolves this kind of inconsistency.
|Consequences=The application of the pattern to resolve the example above is performed as follow:
1.The pattern defines a class Animal_Plant as a union of the definitions of the disjoint classes Animal and Plant;
2.The pattern defines a subsumption between the most specific common super-class of the disjoint classes Fauna-Flora and the hybrid class created Animal_Plant;
3.The pattern defines a subsumption between the defined hybrid class Animal_Plant and the sub-class Carnivorous-Plant involved in the inconsistency.
}}
{{Logical OP Reference Template}}
[[Category:Review assigned]]
{{Scenarios about me}}
{{Reviews about me}}
{{Modeling issues about me}}
{{My references}}
{{Submission to event
|Event=WOP:2009
}}

Submissions:ConceptGroup

2010-05-31T08:29:04Z

EnricoDaga: Text replace - 'WOP2009:Main' to 'WOP:2009'

{{Content_OP_Proposal_toolbar}}
{{Graphical representation header}}
{{Graphical representation
|ImageName=ConceptGroupPattern.jpg
}}
{{Content OP Proposal Template
|SubmittedBy=Pierre-YvesVandenbussche
|Name=ConceptGroup
|Intent=This CP allows designers to represent concept group defined by intention (all concepts satisfying group membership condition) or by extension (all concepts referring a group).
|Domain=Parts and Collections, Vocabulary,
|ContentODPDescription=How a group entity stands alone?, How to represent either a vocabulary subset, a cross vocabulary subset or a whole vocabulary?, How to represent group concept members?
|ReusableOWLBuildingBlock=http://sites.google.com/site/pierreyvesvandenbussche/resources/ConceptGroup.owl
|Scenario=Used to describe whole vocabulary entity or vocabulary concepts subset. Compliant with RefSets in SNOMED-CT or themes in GEMET.
|ReengineeredFrom=SNOMED-CT Reference Sets specification: http://www.ihtsdo.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Docs_01/Technical_Docs/reference_sets.pdf
}}
{{Element list header}}
{{Additional information header}}
[[Category:Review assigned]]
{{Scenarios about me}}
{{Reviews about me}}
{{Modeling issues about me}}
{{My references}}
{{Submission to event
|Event=WOP:2009
}}

Submissions:Classification scheme - adjacency list model - to Taxonomy

2010-05-31T08:29:01Z

EnricoDaga: Text replace - 'WOP2009:Main' to 'WOP:2009'

{{Reengineering_OP_Proposal_toolbar}}
{{Reengineering OP Proposal General Information Template
|Name=Classification scheme - adjacency list model - to Taxonomy
|Problem=Re-engineering a classification scheme which follows the adjacency list model to design a taxonomy.

APPLICABILITY

The semantics of the relation between parent and children items are subClassOf.

There is no multi-inheritance nor cyclic relations.
}}
{{Reengineering OP Proposal NOR Template
|Description=A non-ontological resource holds a classification scheme which follows the adjacency list model.
A classification scheme is a rooted tree of concepts, in which each concept groups entities by some particular degree of similarity.
The semantics of the hierarchical relation between parents and children concepts may vary depending of the context.
The adjacency list data model for hierarchical classifications proposes to create an entity which holds a list of items with a linking column associated to their parent items.
|Graphical Representation=AdjacencyList.png
}}
{{Reengineering OP Proposal Ontology Template
|Description=The ontology generated will be based on the taxonomy architectural pattern (AP-TX-01). Each category in the classification scheme is mapped to a class, and the semantics of the relationship between children and parent categories are mapped to subClassOf relations.
|Graphical Representation=Ontology.png
}}
{{Reengineering OP Proposal Process Template
|Description=1. Identify the classification scheme items which do not have a parent key value, i.e. classification scheme items without parents.

2. For each one of the above identified classification scheme items cei:

2.1. Create the corresponding ontology class, Ci class.

2.2. Identify the classification scheme items, cej , which are children of cei, by using the parent key values.

2.3. For each one of the above identified classification scheme items cej :

2.3.1. Create the corresponding ontology class, Cj class.

2.3.2. Set up the subClassOf relation between Cj and Ci.

2.3.3. Repeat from step 2.2 for cej as a new cei.

3. If there are more than one classification scheme items without parent cei

3.1. Create an ad-hoc class as the root class of the ontology.

3.2. Set up the subClassOf relation between Ci class and the root class.
|Graphical Representation=Wfcsalsocheck.png
}}
{{Reengineering OP Proposal Scenario Example Template
|Description=Suppose that someone wants to build an ontology based on the water areas classification published by FAO. This classification scheme follows the adjacency list data model.
}}
{{Reengineering OP Proposal NOR Example Template
|Description=The FAO classification for water areas groups them according to some different criteria as environment, statistics, and jurisdiction, among others.
|Graphical Representation=AdjacencyListWaterAreas.png
|Web Reference=http://www.fao.org/figis/servlet/RefServlet
}}
{{Reengineering OP Proposal Ontology Example Template
|Description=The ontology generated will be based on the taxonomy architectural pattern (AP-TX-01). Each category in the classification scheme is mapped to a class, and the semantics of the relationship between children and parent categories are mapped to subClassOf relations.
|Graphical Representation=WaterAreaOntology.png
|Web Reference=http://www.fao.org/aims/neon.jsp
}}
{{Reengineering OP Proposal Process Example Template
|Description=1. Create the Water area class.

2. Create the Environmental area class, and set up the subClassOf relation between the Environmental area class and the Water area class.

2.1. Create the Inland/marine class, and set up the subClassOf relation between the Inland/marine class and the Environmental area class.

2.2. Create the Ocean class, and set up the subClassOf relation between the Ocean class and the Environmental area class.

2.3. Create the North/South/Equatorial class, and set up the subClassOf relation between the North a South a Equatorial class and the Environmental area class.

3. Create the Fishing Statistical area class, and set up the subClassOf relation
between the Fishing Statistical area class and the Water area class.

3.1. Create the FAO statistical area class, and set up the subClassOf relation between the FAO statistical area class and the Fishing Statistical area class.

3.2. Create the Areal grid system class, and set up the subClassOf relation between the Areal grid system class and the Fishing Statistical area class.

4. Create the Jurisdiction area class, and set up the subClassOf relation between the Jurisdiction area class and the Water area class.
|Graphical Representation=wfcsalsoexamplecheck.png
}}
{{Reengineering OP Proposal Additional Information Template
|SubmittedBy=BorisVillazón-Terrazas,
|Author=Boris Villazón Terrazas,
|Also known as=Classification scheme to Taxonomy (adjacency list model)
|Related to=Use the Architectural Pattern: TX-AP-01
}}
{{Additional information header}}
[[Category:Review assigned]]
{{Scenarios about me}}
{{Reviews about me}}
{{Modeling issues about me}}
{{My references}}
{{Submission to event
|Event=WOP:2009
}}

'Ontology Design Patterns':WOP2010

2010-05-31T08:29:00Z

EnricoDaga: Text replace - 'WOP2009:Main' to 'WOP:2009'

'Ontology Design Patterns':News/5

2010-05-31T08:28:57Z

EnricoDaga: Text replace - 'WOP2009:Main' to 'WOP:2009'

{{NewsInfo
|SubmittedBy=ValentinaPresutti
|PostedOn=2009-06-30T15:15:34
|ShortText='''[http://vocamp.org/wiki/VoCampDCOctober2009 Vocamp @ Washington D.C., USA. October 2009, supported by WOP]'''
}}
{{TitleDescription Template
|Title=Vocamp @ Washington D.C. supported by WOP
|Description=ODP meets the [http://vocamp.org/wiki/VoCampDCOctober2009 Vocamp] and Linked Data community by co-organizing the Vocamp that will be held in Washington D.C. (USA) on October 2009. The Vocamp will be held right after [http://iswc2009.semanticweb.org/ ISWC 2009] and is supported by the [[WOP:2009|1st WOP workshop]].
}}

'Ontology Design Patterns':News/4

2010-05-31T08:28:53Z

EnricoDaga: Text replace - 'WOP2009:Main' to 'WOP:2009'

{{NewsInfo
|SubmittedBy=EvaBlomqvist
|PostedOn=2009-05-23T11:11:32
|ShortText=This will be the first edition in a series of yearly workshops addressing the emerging topic of ontology patterns, related to the ontologydesignpatterns.org initiative.
}}
{{TitleDescription Template
|Title=Workshop on Ontology Patterns (WOP) accepted at ISWC 2009!
|Description=[http://ontologydesignpatterns.org/wiki/WOP:2009 Visit WOP's homepage]
This will be the first edition in a series of yearly workshops addressing the emerging topic of ontology patterns, related to the ''ontologydesignpatterns.org'' initiative. Patterns need to be shared by a community in order to provide a common language, hence the aim of this workshop is twofold; both providing an arena for proposing and discussing patterns, pattern-based ontologies, systems etc., and broadening the pattern community that will develop its own “language” for discussing and describing relevant problems and their solutions.

The first workshop will be held at ISWC on October 25th 2009. It will be a full-day workshop consisting of three parts; paper presentations, posters, and “pattern writing” sessions. For the pattern writing sessions ontology design patterns will be submitted and reviewed at ''ontologydesignpatterns.org'', including the assignment of an advisor for each accepted pattern submission.

WOP Steering committee:
* Eva Blomqvist, ISTC-CNR (IT)
* Aldo Gangemi, ISTC-CNR (IT)
* Valentina Presutti, ISTC-CNR (IT)
* Alan Rector, University of Manchester (UK)
* Francois Scharffe, INRIA (FR)
* Steffen Staab, University of Koblenz (DE)
* Chris Welty, IBM Watson Research Center (US)

WOP 2009 Chairs:
* Paper chair - Kurt Sandkuhl, Jönköping University (SE)
* Poster chair - Vojtech Svatek, University of Economics, (CZ)
* Pattern chairs - Eva Blomqvist, ISTC-CNR (IT) and Francois Scharffe, INRIA (FR)
}}

'Ontology Design Patterns':KIELD2010

2010-05-31T08:28:49Z

EnricoDaga: Text replace - 'WOP2009:Main' to 'WOP:2009'

== Welcome to the 1st Workshop on Knowledge Injection into and Extraction from Linked Data ==

The first workshop on knowledge injection into and extraction from linked data is a co-located event with [http://ekaw2010.inesc-id.pt/ EKAW 2010], [http://ekaw2010.inesc-id.pt/conference-venue.html held in Lisbon (Portugal)] on October 2010.

'''Notice: the exact date of the workshop is still to be fixed. It will be either October 11th or 15th.'''

__TOC__

== Motivation and objectives ==
The first workshop on Knowledge Injection to and Extraction from Linked Data (KIELD2010 at [http://ekaw2010.inesc-id.pt/ EKAW 2010]) will gather three prominent sub-communities of Knowledge Engineering and Management: Knowledge Modelling, Knowledge Discovery and Linked Data. The rapid growth of the Linked Data cloud, in parallel with on-the-fly design of relevant vocabularies, presents new opportunities for traditional research disciplines.

Most notably:
* Although the popular vocabularies reflect today needs, they sometimes lack deeper ontological reflections. State-of-the-art knowledge modelling, especially the pattern-based ontology design principles, could help connect Linked Data vocabularies to more sophisticated models, while keeping themselves simple. Furthermore, collaborative ontology design methodologies could find their way to the process of vocabulary design, currently undertaken by VoCamp communities and stand-alone groups.
* The linked data themselves represent a large and growing resource woven from numerous components. Empirical knowledge discovery in linked data, carried out by machine learning and data mining algorithms, could reveal interesting patterns on frequently used structures, which could then be fuelled back to the vocabulary design. Existing techniques for mining network-structured data, such as graph databases or web links, are likely to require adaptation so as to take account of links that are typed according to semantically rich and heterogeneous schemata.

Aside the [http://ekaw2010.inesc-id.pt/ EKAW 2010] conference itself, the workshop is informally associated with the series of [[WOP:2009|WOP workshops - Workshops on Ontology Patterns]]. Participants of the previous successful WOP (1st edition at ISWC2009) are encouraged to submit to KIELD 2010.

By this interdisciplinary nature KIELD2010 aims at being of high interest for both researchers and practitioners of all three areas mentioned above. Furthermore, it will give space to ongoing and pioneering research activities, which would still be too preliminary as conference publications, although extremely hot as topics in the semantic technology field.

== Key topics ==

The workshop welcomes research, application, and position papers on the following topics (non-exclusive):

=== Ontology engineering for Linked Data ===
* Methodologies
* Ontology patterns extraction
* Ontology patterns identification and discovery
* Pattern-based triplification
* Anti-patterns or worst practices

=== Data mining from Linked Data ===
* Entity recognition
* Link prediction
* Pattern mining
* Sequential patterns
* Rule mining

=== Linked Data in use ===
* Domain applications based-on linked data
* Linked data exploitation
* Interaction with linked data

== Paper Submission ==

Two types of submissions will be accepted: full papers presenting recent research results, and position papers presenting either research in progress or key issues in the scientific discussion.

All submissions have to be formatted according to the Springer LNCS format, in PDF. Full papers are limited to 12 pages and position papers to 6 pages.

The EasyChair system will be used for the submission and review process. (coming soon)

The accepted papers will be published in workshop notes, under CEUR. (to be confirmed)

== Program Committee ==

* Eva Blomqvist, ISTC-CNR, Italy
* Ciro Cattuto, ISI Foundation, Italy
* Mathieu d'Aquin, KMI Open University, UK
* Nicola Fanizzi, University of Bari
* Aldo Gangemi, STLab ISTC-CNR, Italy
* Alfio Gliozzo, STLAb ISTC-CNR, Italy
* Marko Grobelnik, Jozef Stefan Institute, Slovenia
* David Jensen, University of Massachusetts Amherst, USA
* Agnieszka Lawrynowicz, Poznan University of Technology, Poland
* Pascal Poncelet, Ecole des Mines d'Ales, France
* Marko Rodriguez, AT&T, and Vrije Universiteit Brussels, Belgium
* Steffen Staab, University of Koblenz-Landau, Germany

== Organizers ==

* Valentina Presutti, ISTC-CNR Rome
* E-mail: valentina.presutti_at_cnr.it

* Francois Scharffe, INRIA Grenoble Rhone-Alpes
* E-mail: francois.scharffe_at_inria.fr

* Vojtech Svatek, University of Economics, Prague
* E-mail: svatek_at_vse.cz

== Important dates ==

* July 15, 2010: Paper submission deadline
* August 9, 2010: Paper acceptance notification
* August 25, 2010: Camera-ready versions of papers

[[Category:Event]]
{{Event
|Name=1st Workshop on Knowledge Injection into and Extraction from Linked Data (KIELD2010)
|HasStartDate=2010/10/11
|HasEndDate=2010/10/15
}}
{{Submission deadline
|deadline=2010/07/15
|expired=The submission deadline has expired!
|intime=You are in time for submitting your paper.
}}

'Ontology Design Patterns':Events

2010-05-31T08:28:46Z

EnricoDaga: Text replace - 'WOP2009:Main' to 'WOP:2009'

[[Image:Event.png|70px]]

===Workshops===
* [[Odp:WOP2010|2nd Workshop on Ontology Patterns (WOP) - at ISWC 2010]]
* [[Odp:KIELD2010|1st Workshop on Knowledge Injection and and Extraction from Linked Data (KIELD) - at EKAW 2010]]
* [[WOP:2009|1st Workshop on Ontology Patterns (WOP) - at ISWC 2009]]

=== XD camps ===

* [[Odp:AMICamp2| AMI Ontology Camp II]]

=== Face to Face meetings ===

* [[Odp:EB-1st-f2f-2009Feb23| First f2f editorial board meeting]]

WOP2009

2010-05-31T08:28:42Z

EnricoDaga: Text replace - 'WOP2009:Main' to 'WOP:2009'

#REDIRECT [[WOP:2009]]

WOP:2009/Awards

2010-05-31T08:27:24Z

EnricoDaga:

== Best Pattern ==

''' [[Submissions:OnlynessIsLoneliness_%28OIL%29 | OIL, by Oscar Corcho and Catherine Roussey, receives best pattern award!]]'''

Reviewers and workshop participants will together distinguish the best pattern submission (final decision made by pattern chairs). The best pattern award takes into account the following criteria:
* Quality of the submission as assessed by reviewers
* Quality of the extended abstract describing the pattern in the proceedings
* Relevance and significance of the pattern
* Presentation of the pattern
* Activity of the author during the revision phase and discussion contributions during the workshop

The best pattern award will be presented to the winner at the closing of the workshop and published on this website.

[[Category:WOP2009]]

WOP:2009/Submission

2010-05-31T08:25:24Z

EnricoDaga:

WOP:2009/Submission

2010-05-31T08:25:09Z

EnricoDaga:

WOP:Main

2010-05-31T08:19:23Z

EnricoDaga:

==WOP 2010==

[[WOP:2010|Under construction!]]


==WOP 2009 Edition==

See edition at ISWC 2009: [[WOP:2009|WOP 2009 Edition]].

WOP:2010

2010-05-31T08:19:06Z

EnricoDaga: WOP:/2010 moved to WOP:2010

Under construction

WOP:2010

2010-05-31T08:18:57Z

EnricoDaga: New page: Under construction

Under construction

WOP:Main

2010-05-31T08:18:41Z

EnricoDaga:

==WOP 2010==

[[WOP:/2010|Under construction!]]


==WOP 2009 Edition==

See edition at ISWC 2009: [[WOP:2009|WOP 2009 Edition]].

WOP:Main

2010-05-31T08:18:23Z

EnricoDaga:

==WOP 2010==

Under construction!


==WOP 2009 Edition==

See edition at ISWC 2009: [[WOP:2009|WOP 2009 Edition]].

WOP:2009/Awards

2010-05-31T08:17:48Z

EnricoDaga: WOP:Awards moved to WOP:2009/Awards

WOP:Submission

2010-05-31T08:13:11Z

EnricoDaga:

WOP:2009/Submission

2010-05-31T08:11:53Z

EnricoDaga: WOP:Submission moved to WOP:2009/Submission

WOP:Submission

2010-05-31T08:11:53Z

EnricoDaga: WOP:Submission moved to WOP:2009/Submission

#REDIRECT [[WOP:2009/Submission]]