Reviews:AlessandroAdamou about DisjointnessOfComplement (DOC) - Revision history

AlessandroAdamou at 22:32, 9 September 2009

2009-09-09T22:32:53Z

AlessandroAdamou at 21:17, 9 September 2009

2009-09-09T21:17:48Z

AlessandroAdamou at 11:38, 8 September 2009

2009-09-08T11:38:21Z

AlessandroAdamou: New page: {{Content OP Proposal Review Template |CreationDate=2009/9/8 |SubmittedBy=AlessandroAdamou |ContentOPUnderReview=DisjointnessOfComplement (DOC) |RevisionID=5597 |Score=0 - needs major revi...

2009-09-08T11:33:48Z

New page: {{Content OP Proposal Review Template |CreationDate=2009/9/8 |SubmittedBy=AlessandroAdamou |ContentOPUnderReview=DisjointnessOfComplement (DOC) |RevisionID=5597 |Score=0 - needs major revi...

New page

{{Content OP Proposal Review Template
|CreationDate=2009/9/8
|SubmittedBy=AlessandroAdamou
|ContentOPUnderReview=DisjointnessOfComplement (DOC)
|RevisionID=5597
|Score=0 - needs major revision
|ReviewSummary=The proposal looks sensible to me, but I do expect that other peers might believe it to be rather trivial, thus I would recommend it for discussion at WOP. It is however essential that this proposal is presented in such a way as to target naive developers.
|ReviewConfidence=ODPs: medium/high
Description Logics: medium
|ReviewProblems=Nothing in particular as for the pattern itself. For the presentation, see below.
|ReviewRelevance=This proposal could bring up some fruitful discussion during the workshop. I, for one, had never even thought about the very existence of such a pitfall in ontology engineering, and the first time I read it I was questioning the actual utility of such a pattern, though some more thorough analysis made me change my mind.
|ReviewReusability=I'm reasonably sure it is unwittingly being used in many ontology design activities as I write. At least I hope so.
|ReviewUnderstandability=Immediate for the knowledgeable ontology developer, but since the proposal is aimed at solving a trivial yet possibly frequent issue, maybe a step-by-step explanation "for dummies" on how to use it could help. See suggestions below.
|ReviewClearProblem=This aspect should be developed in more detail. Please bear in mind that this description should be thorough enough to aid all ontology engineers, let alone the least experienced ones.

Since we are mentioning logical antipatterns, I think a couple of examples showing the bizarre consequences of a failure to apply such a pattern. Like, say, showing how statements such as :

- SaltLake isEquivalentTo not FreshWaterLake
- Balkhash isA SaltLake
- SpiderMan isDifferentFrom Balkhash

then reasoning could infer that SpiderMan is a FreshWaterLake. Anyway, the more absurd and shocking the examples, the higher the chance for inexperienced ontology developers to get it right.
|ReviewClearRelevance=As per problem description, the authors should display how such bizarre phenomena should not occur if disjointness is used instead.
|ReviewFigures=I obviously do not expect a "classic ontology" diagram, but an illustration depicting the difference between the two types of statements is strongly recommended. A couple of Venn diagrams, one for complement and one for disjointness, should do fine.
|ReviewMissing=Nothing I haven't pointed out already.
}}

@@ Line 16: / Line 16: @@
 |ReviewClearProblem=This aspect should be developed in more detail. Please bear in mind that this description should be thorough enough to aid all ontology engineers, let alone the least experienced ones.
-Since we are mentioning logical antipatterns, I think a couple of examples showing the bizarre consequences of a failure to apply such a pattern. Like, say, showing how statements such as :
+Since we are mentioning logical antipatterns, I think a couple of examples showing the bizarre consequences of a failure to apply such a pattern would help. Like, say, showing how statements such as :
-- SaltLake isEquivalentTo not FreshWaterLake
+- SaltLake isEquivalentTo not FreshWaterLake<br>
-- Balkhash isA SaltLake
+- Balkhash isA SaltLake<br>
-- SpiderMan isDifferentFrom Balkhash
+- SpiderMan isDifferentFrom Balkhash<br>
 then reasoning could infer that SpiderMan is a FreshWaterLake. Anyway, the more absurd and shocking the examples, the higher the chance for inexperienced ontology developers to get it right.

@@ Line 4: / Line 4: @@
 |RevisionID=5597
 |CreationDate=2009/9/8
-|Score=0 - needs major revision
+|Score=1 - needs minor revision
 |ReviewSummary=The proposal looks sensible to me, but I do expect that other peers might believe it to be rather trivial, thus I would recommend it for discussion at WOP. It is however essential that this proposal is presented in such a way as to target naive developers.
 |ReviewConfidence=ODPs: medium/high

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 {{Content OP Proposal Review Template
 |SubmittedBy=AlessandroAdamou
 |ContentOPUnderReview=DisjointnessOfComplement (DOC)
 |RevisionID=5597
 |Score=0 - needs major revision
 |ReviewSummary=The proposal looks sensible to me, but I do expect that other peers might believe it to be rather trivial, thus I would recommend it for discussion at WOP. It is however essential that this proposal is presented in such a way as to target naive developers.
@@ Line 11: / Line 11: @@
 |ReviewRelevance=This proposal could bring up some fruitful discussion during the workshop. I, for one, had never even thought about the very existence of such a pitfall in ontology engineering, and the first time I read it I was questioning the actual utility of such a pattern, though some more thorough analysis made me change my mind.
 |ReviewReusability=I'm reasonably sure it is unwittingly being used in many ontology design activities as I write. At least I hope so.
 |ReviewUnderstandability=Immediate for the knowledgeable ontology developer, but since the proposal is aimed at solving a trivial yet possibly frequent issue, maybe a step-by-step explanation "for dummies" on how to use it could help. See suggestions below.
 |ReviewClearProblem=This aspect should be developed in more detail. Please bear in mind that this description should be thorough enough to aid all ontology engineers, let alone the least experienced ones.