Reviews:VojtechSvatek about ConceptTerms
From Odp
VojtechSvatek about ConceptTerms (Revision ID: 5714)
Overall suggestion (score): 0 - needs major revision
Review Summary: First of all, the pattern looks quite unfinished and/or sloppy in terms of documentation. Only when the modelling choices are explained, a true review could be done.
Reviewer Confidence: The pattern is currently so simple that not much special expertise is needed. I am confident in my assessment.
Problems: It is not clear what a compound non preferred term looks like and why it is only made of preferred terms.
The reification of the relation between a concept and the terms should be clearly justified.
The scenario is too brief.Community Relevance: The solution is kind of trivial. There are numerous efforts related to handling lexical aspects of ontologies.
Relation to Best Practices:
Reusability: High degree of reuse.
Relations to Other Patterns: The pattern should probably mention the SKOS vocabulary, which addresses most of the problems in question.
Overall Understandability: Simple and understandable, except for clearly missing information.
Clear Problem Description: Could do, although I would imagine something a bit different under 'language complexity'.
Clear Relevance and Consequences: Not much information about consequences.
Clear Figures and Illustrations: Only the basic diagram, which looks OK.
Missing Information: Especially information (and examples) on compound non-preferred terms.
Posted: 2009/9/8 Last modified: 2009/9/8
