Reviews:OlafNoppens about Literal Reification

Revision as of 13:43, 16 September 2010 by OlafNoppens (Talk | contribs)

(diff) ←Older revision | Current revision (diff) | Newer revision→ (diff)

OlafNoppens about Literal Reification (Revision ID: Reification?oldid=10062 10062)

Overall suggestion (score): 2 - accept for certification

Review Summary: The pattern states how to express reification of literal values in OWL by introducing an intermediate individual (type of Literal) which is connected (via hasLiteralValue) to a blank literal value, or via hasSameLiteralValue to another intermediate individual.

I have two minor remarks (which depends on each other):

(1) Literal is a subclass of (= 1 hasLiteralValue). I was wondering whether one could define literal equivalent to (= 1 hasLiteralValue or = 1 hasSameLiteralValue). The idea is that a literal has always either a literal value directly or indirectly (via hasSameLiteralValue)

(2)SWRL rules are used (in that sense it would also be valid if Literal is defined equivalent to = 1 hasLiteralValue because the SWRL rules guarantee this behaviour). I suggest to add a remark to the description and also to the diagram. Because the application of the pattern assumes SWRL + OWL.

Reviewer Confidence: high

Problems:

Community Relevance: high

Relation to Best Practices:

Reusability: high

Relations to Other Patterns:

Overall Understandability: good

Clear Problem Description: good

Clear Relevance and Consequences: good

Clear Figures and Illustrations: good - I suggest as mentioned above that the desription and the figures make a reference to rules / SWRL

Missing Information: