http://ontologydesignpatterns.org/index.php?action=history&feed=atom&title=Reviews%3AMathieuDAquin_about_DisjointnessOfComplement_%28DOC%29 2026-04-18T05:23:32Z Revision history for this page on the wiki MediaWiki 1.25.6 http://ontologydesignpatterns.org/index.php?title=Reviews:MathieuDAquin_about_DisjointnessOfComplement_(DOC)&diff=5720&oldid=prev 2009-09-08T12:50:55Z

<p>New page: {{Content OP Proposal Review Template |CreationDate=2009/9/8 |SubmittedBy=MathieuDAquin |ContentOPUnderReview=DisjointnessOfComplement (DOC) |RevisionID=5716 |Score=0 - needs major revisio...</p> <p><b>New page</b></p><div>{{Content OP Proposal Review Template<br /> |CreationDate=2009/9/8<br /> |SubmittedBy=MathieuDAquin<br /> |ContentOPUnderReview=DisjointnessOfComplement (DOC)<br /> |RevisionID=5716<br /> |Score=0 - needs major revision<br /> |ReviewSummary=I am not really sure what to do here. <br /> What is proposed is an anti-pattern: a pattern which is sometimes used improperly and should, in these cases, be replaced by another. As far as I can tell, the portal is not intended to be used for such patterns.<br /> in addition, many elements are missing.<br /> It could be interesting to discuss anti-pattern and whether the proposed ones are good, what should be the description of such patterns, etc.<br /> |ReviewConfidence=OK<br /> |ReviewProblems=This does not fit the usual design patterns which are meant to be reused, but correspond to a pattern that should not be reused in cases where it is does not express the intended meaning. <br /> <br /> In addition, I am not actually convinced with the relation between the anti-pattern and the solution. The one to use is depends on what need to be expressed and I am not convinced that the one proposed corresponds to the one most often wrongly applied.<br /> |ReviewRelevance=As an anti-pattern, maybe. <br /> |ReviewReusability=The anti-pattern itself should not be reused. Sometimes the solution (replacement) should not be used either.<br /> |ReviewUnderstandability=OK, except that most of the necessary is missing.<br /> |ReviewClearRelevance=Not really, as it is not explained how to detect where this anti-pattern applies (when it is used incorrectly). Not appropriate explanation of the consequences of using this one instead of the solution (can be easily understood for users familiar with DLs, but probably not by others).<br /> |ReviewFigures=No.<br /> |ReviewMissing=It is not clear where this pattern comes from, what makes the authors think it is common, etc. See also &quot;Clear Relevance and Consequences&quot;<br /> }}</div>

MathieuDAquin