Changes between Version 6 and Version 7 of ISO15926inOWLforRDSWIP

Timestamp:

06/17/08 18:39:56 (16 years ago)

Author:

jowik (IP: 84.208.69.213)

Comment:

--

ISO15926inOWLforRDSWIP

@@ -17 +17 @@
 SPARQL queries need to be able to perform well against data in this form in a secure way.  That is to say, it is necessary that some data be visible to only selected security principals, and not impact the performance of the system (especially for highly restricted users such as public access).  Moreover, this means that any literal present in the system must '''not''' be visible to a user unless that user can view relationships that address that literal.
 
+=== Johan W. Klüwer ===
+
+The '''basic representation''' of ISO 15926 reference data in the RDS/WIP should be complete with regard to what can be expressed using ISO 15926 Part 2 constructs. It should also be restricted to Part 2, to not contain expressions that are not sanctioned by the standard. These criteria are covered by the representation in (a subset of) OWL DL described at [wiki:ISO15926inOWL]. Reference data in this format can be checked for conformance to Part 2 by means of standard DL inference procedures. The format is also suitable as a sublanguage of that in which Part 7 templates are defined (see diagram on MmtSig#Templatedevelopment).
+
+'''Derived representations''' of reference data, expressed using current W3C standards,  must be provided for use in applications. Reference data in Part 2 constructs that have RDF/OWL native counterparts need to be accessible in their RDF/OWL native form (including [http://www.tc184-sc4.org/wg3ndocs/wg3n1328/lifecycle_integration_schema/lexical/specialization.html Specialization] as RDFS [http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-guide-20040210/#DefiningSimpleClasses subclass expressions], [http://www.tc184-sc4.org/wg3ndocs/wg3n1328/lifecycle_integration_schema/lexical/class_of_relationship.html ClassOfRelationship] as [http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-guide-20040210/#SimpleProperties object properties], etc.). This needs to be developed incrementally, with the aim of eventually covering the full scope of the intended meaning of Part 2. 
+
+Applications will have varying requirements on the complexity of representation. The RDS/WIP should therefore provide several derived views of the same data.
+
+Facts expressed in Part 7 template expressions should be allowed to exist in the RDS/WIP even when the corresponding facts in the basic Part 2 format do not. However, mechanisms then need to be in place to discover inconsistencies between Part 7 and Part 2/Part 4   expressions.
+
 == Open Issues ==