Reviews:AndreaNuzzolese about Reactor pattern
From Odp
AndreaNuzzolese (Talk | contribs)
(New page: {{Content OP Proposal Review Template |CreationDate=2012/8/29 |SubmittedBy=AndreaNuzzolese |ContentOPUnderReview=Reactor pattern |RevisionID=11175 |Score=1 - needs minor revision |ReviewSu...)
Next diff →
Current revision
Overall suggestion (score): 1 - needs minor revision
In my opinion there is a lack of usage of existing content pattern. For example the ProcessParameter class can be defined by specializing the Parameter class from the parameter pattern (http://ontologydesignpatterns.org/cp/owl/parameter.owl). I also see an Event as a n-ary relation. This allows to express the Event class by specializing the Situation content pattern.
I don't understand the need of the definition of the description object property. If its intent is to express the descriptive context of a concept the Description pattern could be used. Otherwise an annotation property or even the rdfs:comment could be used.
I find the existential restriction for the Process class to strict for what is used as a top level class.
The author is encouraged to use labels and comments for entities defined in the pattern.Posted: 2012/8/29 Last modified: 2012/8/29