(Article updated via HTTP request) |
|||
Line 36: | Line 36: | ||
## have an optional URL field in the case of it being a web reference. | ## have an optional URL field in the case of it being a web reference. | ||
## in the case of a non-web reference, everything that is needed will be in the ReferenceDescription (e.g. a reference for a paper in a conference proceedings). Often papers have URLs too the .pdf. | ## in the case of a non-web reference, everything that is needed will be in the ReferenceDescription (e.g. a reference for a paper in a conference proceedings). Often papers have URLs too the .pdf. | ||
− | # Having OWL/RDF Ontology as a type of reference will be redundant for patterns and exemplary ontologies, and modeling issues where there already are properties for this (e.g. OWLImplemntation and OntologyURI). | + | # Having OWL/RDF Ontology as a type of reference will be redundant for patterns and exemplary ontologies, and modeling issues where there already are properties for this (e.g. OWLImplemntation and OntologyURI). I'm not sure we need a type for ontology at all. |
# The types of references will therefore include: | # The types of references will therefore include: | ||
## Project Home Page (instead of Project Web Site - small difference) | ## Project Home Page (instead of Project Web Site - small difference) |
Title: References for Exemplary Tasks
Description: Currently, there is no good way for users to enter references with links and information about them. This is really a big deal, references are very important for this catalogue to be useful. Needs to have a solution that allows entering text as well as a link and to have them in a nice table. May also want a longer text description than a link name. May want a reference type too.
Sub-tasks: This task has no sub-tasks
We can give the possibility to add references in the following way:
The workflow ca be:
This is close to what we want. I propose the following changes: