http://ontologydesignpatterns.org/index.php?action=history&feed=atom&title=Reviews%3AMathieuDAquin_about_ConceptGroup 2026-04-18T05:24:44Z Revision history for this page on the wiki MediaWiki 1.25.6 http://ontologydesignpatterns.org/index.php?title=Reviews:MathieuDAquin_about_ConceptGroup&diff=5718&oldid=prev 2009-09-08T12:34:02Z

<p>New page: {{Content OP Proposal Review Template |CreationDate=2009/9/8 |SubmittedBy=MathieuDAquin |ContentOPUnderReview=ConceptGroup |RevisionID=5660 |Score=0 - needs major revision |ReviewSummary=T...</p> <p><b>New page</b></p><div>{{Content OP Proposal Review Template<br /> |CreationDate=2009/9/8<br /> |SubmittedBy=MathieuDAquin<br /> |ContentOPUnderReview=ConceptGroup<br /> |RevisionID=5660<br /> |Score=0 - needs major revision<br /> |ReviewSummary=This pattern, as far as I understand, to represents groups of concepts. <br /> I think the pattern would be interesting to discuss, but suffer from a number of problems as detailed below.<br /> |ReviewConfidence=I am not really clear about this particular pattern.<br /> |ReviewProblems=The general issues I see here concern clarity and possible usage.<br /> The first thing is that I am not sure what is meant by concept here. Does it corresponds to the concept of an ontology? In this case shouldn't it be related to owl:Class in the OWL description? This would cause a number of issues at the logical level, in particular, if Group is a concept. This needs to be made clear in my opinion.<br /> <br /> Also, Group should be called ConceptGroup.<br /> <br /> I don't really understand the difference between subgroup and narrowerThan. Isn't a subgroup narrower?<br /> <br /> Finally, I don't see a clear application for this pattern as is.<br /> |ReviewRelevance=Not clear to me.<br /> |ReviewBestPractice=The current form of the pattern doesn't seem to relate with best practices, and at least in naming, is not really appropriate.<br /> |ReviewReusability=Unclear.<br /> |ReviewRelations=PartOf pattern applied to concepts?<br /> |ReviewUnderstandability=Low<br /> |ReviewClearProblem=Not really. I don't in which scenario this helps.<br /> |ReviewClearRelevance=Not really.<br /> |ReviewFigures=OK.<br /> |ReviewMissing=example of usage, clear description/definition of the entities.<br /> }}</div>

MathieuDAquin