From: Hart, Lewis (lhart@grci.com)
Date: 08/30/01
John - Here are some general comments:
1. I would change the symbols indicating Classes (green) and Properties
(blue) slightly. First, I would remove the line between multiple types.
(e.g. shirtsize) Then every thing above the line is a type, and the ID is
below. I would also use different shapes instead of color to differentiate
Classes and Properties. Not every one has a color printer and some folks
have color blindness. This is not too important for 'first order' entities
that have "Class" or "Property" in in there type names, but second order
entities could be confusing. For example, you can not tell directly that a
Restriction is a Class.
2. Literals and Instances need to be differentiated. "short", "medium", and
"tall" are instances of the Class Height, but "1" and "2" are untyped
Literals. They should use different symbols. Also, instances need to
indicate what class/property they are an instances of and perhaps use
different symbols for instances of classes vs instances of properties.
(Maybe dashed versions of the Class and Property symbols?)
3. I did not see the instance of a typed literal (e.g. <xsd:integer
rdf:value="13"/> ) in your diagram. You need a symbol for these. Maybe the
symbol for Literal with a type and separator line like Class and Property.
4. I also did not see a symbol for the ontology itself anywhere, but you
will need to differentiate ontologies if there are multiple ones being used.
5. Multiple ontologies and namespaces need to be handled better. How does
the viewer know what ontology/namespace "over12" comes from? How do I know
that "over12" is not part of XSD? For that matter, how do I know what XSD:
is? I would recommend that:
- full URIs be used to identify "external" elements, or something
analogous to
xmlns:xsd ="http://www.w3.org/2000/10/XMLSchema#" be available.
- the term "URI" in the type slot be replaced with the actual type
(and use the correct shaped symbol) or left blank for unknown and
- dashed lines be omitted, just use the regular symbols.
-----Original Message-----
From: John Flynn [ <mailto:jflynn@bbn.com> mailto:jflynn@bbn.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 9:48 AM
To: <mailto:daml-graphical@daml.org> daml-graphical@daml.org
Subject: VisioDAML
>I have created a Visio template that includes a stencil with graphical
representations of all DAML+OIL language
>constructs. You can drag and drop the various DAML+OIL constructs onto the
drawing page to create the representation
>of an ontology. Its initial purpose is to provide a relatively easy means
to graphically represent DAML ontologies.
>I will post it on daml.org for download soon, but first I wanted to get
some comments on some of the graphical
>conventions. A JPEG file of the VisioDAML drawing of the DAML+OIL revised
example ontology (less instances) is >attached.
>
>The example ontology is at:
<http://www.daml.org/2001/03/daml+oil-ex.daml>
http://www.daml.org/2001/03/daml+oil-ex.daml
>
>Some specific questions: Should the inverseOf and disjointWith connectors
have arrow-points at both ends as shown in
>the VisioDAML drawing? Should any of the other connectors have arrow-points
at both ends?
No, to both. I would have the arrows represent the triple that would be in
RDF, with the arrow head on the object end. I believe you intend the
diagrams as a representation of the DAML syntax, so semantics should not be
shown.
>
>Also, the dashed-line boxes labeled URI represent references in the example
ontology to data types that are remotely >declared. On the VisioDAML drawing
when you mouse over the dashed-line box a comment appears showing the actual
URI. >Any better ideas on how to represent these remote declarations?
See above (#5).
>
>Any other comments on the drawing conventions are most welcome.
>
>Note that the graphical representation of the DAML+OIL revised example
ontology makes readily apparent some of the >errors in the example. The
Class FullTimeOccupation and the ObjectProperties, hasOccupation and
hasSpouse, are >colored red in the VisioDAML drawing to illustrate they are
not declared anywhere in the example ontology. Also, the
>TransitiveProperties, has Ancestor and descendant, as well as the
DataTypeProperty shirtsize, can be seen at the
>right side of the drawing and are not connected to any other part of the
example ontology.
>
>John
>
>John Flynn
>
>(703) 284-4612
>
>DAML Integration and Transition PM
>
>BBN Technologies
>
>
- Lewis
___________________________________________
Lewis L Hart
GRC International lhart@grci.com
1900 Gallows Rd. Voice (703)506-5938
Vienna, Va 22182 Fax (703)556-4261
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 03/26/02 EST