Reviews:FrancoisScharffe about ConceptGroup

Revision as of 11:59, 11 September 2009 by FrancoisScharffe (Talk | contribs)

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

FrancoisScharffe about ConceptGroup (Revision ID: 5799)

Overall suggestion (score): 0 - needs major revision

Review Summary: This pattern is meant to be used to represent group memberships of concepts. Sub and super groups can be represented, and both extensional (declared) and intensional (according to a property) memberships can be modeled.

The pattern seems interesting but present many shadowed areas. I can deduce from the usage of the terms concept ans broader/narrower relations that this pattern is to be used together with the SKOS vocabulary. If this is the case this should be made explicit. Otherwise, what is a concept wrt an owl:Class ? I lack an example instantiation of the pattern. The Solution Description contains questions ... Questions are no solutions...

In summary I think it is an interesting pattern which could certainly find applications when publishing terminologies with SKOS. The pattern however needs to be better described. This pattern can definitely lead to interesting discussions.

Reviewer Confidence: average

Problems: The problem of modeling group membership is important

Community Relevance: relevant

Relation to Best Practices: If there are other solutions they are not mentioned by the pattern.

Reusability: Yesm this pattern seem to be usable in a variety of situations

Relations to Other Patterns: It is only indicated that this pattern is extracted from SNOMED-CT.

Overall Understandability: Okay

Clear Problem Description: Okay

Clear Relevance and Consequences: Here it misses a statement about the pattern usage together with SKOS

Clear Figures and Illustrations: Okay

Missing Information: The pattern description misses an example instanciation.