Community:Multiple Alternative Classification Criteria - Revision history

BenedictoRodriguezCastro at 18:24, 6 September 2010

2010-09-06T18:24:11Z

BenedictoRodriguezCastro: Community:Faceted Classification Scheme moved to Community:Multiple Alternative Classification Criteria: The name "Faceted Classification Scheme" corresponds to the solution of the modeling issue. The new name is the modeling issue itself.

2010-09-06T18:16:58Z

Community:Faceted Classification Scheme moved to Community:Multiple Alternative Classification Criteria: The name "Faceted Classification Scheme" corresponds to the solution of the modeling issue. The new name is the modeling issue itself.

BenedictoRodriguezCastro at 18:08, 6 September 2010

2010-09-06T18:08:47Z

BenedictoRodriguezCastro at 18:08, 6 September 2010

2010-09-06T18:08:00Z

BenedictoRodriguezCastro at 17:31, 6 September 2010

2010-09-06T17:31:05Z

BenedictoRodriguezCastro at 17:26, 6 September 2010

2010-09-06T17:26:00Z

BenedictoRodriguezCastro at 17:24, 6 September 2010

2010-09-06T17:24:16Z

BenedictoRodriguezCastro at 16:51, 6 September 2010

2010-09-06T16:51:04Z

BenedictoRodriguezCastro at 16:38, 6 September 2010

2010-09-06T16:38:52Z

BenedictoRodriguezCastro at 16:28, 6 September 2010

2010-09-06T16:28:09Z

@@ Line 15: / Line 15: @@
 |Scenario=Retrieve all "dishwashing detergents" whose "Brand" is "Palmolive" and whose "Scent" is "lemon".
 |ProposedSolution=http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1666716/Attachments/detergent_fcs_normalisation_prot3x_owl.owl
-|RelatedPattern=Partition, Normalization, ClassAsPropertyValue
+|RelatedPattern=Partition, Normalization, ClassAsPropertyValue, Faceted Classification Scheme,
 }}
 {{Additional information header}}

@@ Line 37: / Line 37: @@
 The OWL file in section '''Proposed Solutions''' provides an OWL DL implementation of
-the example FCS in section '''Diagram''' applying the Normalization ODP as outlined in the paper mentioned.
+the example FCS in section '''Diagram''' applying the [[Submissions:Normalization|Normalization]] ODP as outlined in the paper mentioned.
 {{My references}}
 {{Modeling Issue toolbar}}

@@ Line 4: / Line 4: @@
 Faceted Classification Scheme (FCS).
 |Description=This modelling issue describes a specific, very recurrent modeling scenario in ontology development, subject to the vulnerability of ad-hoc modeling practices that could potentially lead to unexpected or undesirable results in ontology artifacts.
 The scenario consists of domain-specific concepts that can be represented according to multiple alternative classification criteria.
-−
 }}
 {{Graphical representation

@@ Line 5: / Line 5: @@
 |Description=This modelling issue describes a specific, very recurrent modeling scenario in ontology development, subject to the vulnerability of ad-hoc modeling practices that could potentially lead to unexpected or undesirable results in ontology artifacts.
 The scenario consists of domain-specific concepts that can be represented according to multiple alternative classification criteria.
-To the best of our knowledge, guidelines for the conceptualization and representation of domain-specific concepts prone to be described based on multiple (potentially alternative) classification criteria, has not been explicitly considered in the context of ontology modeling for the Semantic Web.
 }}
 {{Graphical representation
@@ Line 19: / Line 19: @@
 }}
 {{Additional information header}}
 General examples of domain-specific concepts that exhibit the characteristics described abound, going from a "bibliographic reference", (which could be classified according to several criteria such as "subject", "author", "publication venue", etc.); to a "toy" (which could be classified based on "suitable age", "brand", "subject type", etc.).
 The list of examples can go on.

@@ Line 6: / Line 6: @@
 The scenario consists of domain-specific concepts that can be represented according to multiple alternative classification criteria.
 To the best of our knowledge, guidelines for the conceptualization and representation of domain-specific concepts prone to be described based on multiple (potentially alternative) classification criteria, has not been explicitly considered in the context of ontology modeling for the Semantic Web.
 }}
 {{Graphical representation

← Older revision	Revision as of 18:16, 6 September 2010
(No difference)

@@ Line 13: / Line 13: @@
 Other examples of domain-specific concepts that can fit into the modeling scenario described are particularly interesting because they are used in well-known ontology development literature using OWL.
-They include: "Wine" [1], "Person" (in the context of family history relations) [2], or "Pizza" [3].
+They include: "Wine" [[Community:References/OWL web ontology language guide|(Welty et al., 2004)]], "Person" (in the context of family history relations) [[Community:References/OWL 2 web ontology language primer|(Krotzsch et al., 2009)]], or "Pizza" [[Community:References/A Practical Guide To Building OWL Ontologies Using Protege 4 and CO-ODE Tools Edition 1 2 2|(Horridge et al., 2009)]].
 However, in none of them, they refer explicitly to the various classification criteria of the domain concept that are considered implicitly, nor attempt to represent these criteria explicitly in the respective ontology models developed.
@@ Line 34: / Line 34: @@
 }}
 {{Additional information header}}
-A more detailed explanation of this modeling issue and the rationale of one proposed solution is presented in the  paper: [http://eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/21488/ How to ''Reuse'' a Faceted Classification and Put It on the ''Semantic'' Web].
+A more detailed explanation of this modeling issue and the rationale of one proposed solution is presented in the  paper: [[Community:References/How to Reuse a Faceted Classification and Put it on the Semantic Web|(Rodriguez-Castro et al., 2010)]].

@@ Line 11: / Line 11: @@
 We have seen in our own experience that lack of specific design guidelines leaves ample room for conceptual errors when trying to develop a simple domain-specific ontology model for such concepts.
 For example, common mistakes when trying to represent these concepts and their classification criteria are to use subsumption relations between classes when in fact a part-of relation would be in order, or to use subsumption to model relationships that are outside OWL DL expressivity altogether.
 This modeling issue refers to the conceptualization of a specific domain concept using a Faceted Classification Scheme (FCS).

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 {{TitleDescription Template
-|Title=Faceted Classification Scheme (FCS)
+|Title=Multiple Alternative Classification Criteria.
 |Description=This modeling issue refers to the conceptualization of a specific domain concept using a Faceted Classification Scheme (FCS).
 A FCS is defined as: "a set of mutually exclusive and jointly exhaustive categories, each made by isolating one perspective on the items (a facet), that combine to completely describe all the objects in question, and which users can use, by searching and browsing, to find what they need" [[Community:References/How to Make a Faceted Classification and Put It On the Web 2|(Denton, 2003)]].