[seek-kr-sms] GrOWL -metadata panel design.

[Ferdinando Villa]

Please DO support imported ontologies. They're necessary to grasp the
meaning of what you're looking at. We don't want to be bound to creating
ontologies that only embody a fully self-consistent concept space.

And speaking of this, what about some non-tech terminology to clarify
things for the user? In the IMA I call "concept space" the namespace id.
We can find a better name, but if we had a little status bar with the
current "Concept space: xxxx" name always highlighted, changing as you
switch to imported ontologies, and we make sure that the namespace id
means something coherent and understandable, I think it would make sense
to the user - certainly better than saying "namespace" anywhere. It's a
syntax vs. semantics issue. Of course the URI would be in a normally
hidden info pane or dialog as Serguei suggests.  And of course I would
definitely hide stuff belonging to core namespaces such as rdfs or owl
(we could configure these in).

ferdinando


On Wed, 2004-06-30 at 11:08, Serguei Krivov wrote:
> So I would add #4: 
> #4: No namespaces exposed in GUI whatsoever
> Matt
> 
> 
> Apparently, we have two different questions:
>  1. About exposing namespaces of say classes and relations during
> browsing and editing. We may hide them ,which would work fine when there
> is no any imported ontology. If there is an imported ontology then one
> maight like to know from where definitions came. But certainly, looking
> at the long URI may frighten anyone, including myself. 
> If we decide that at this point we do not support imported ontologies
> then #4 is just fine. If we want import, then the question is- how we
> can specify node namespaces without messing up with repugnant URIs?
> 
> 2. About specifying global namespaces which go to the heading of
> ontology specification. There are many standard namespaces that could be
> generated automatically, such as:
> xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
> xmlns:rdfs="http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#"
> xmlns:owl=http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#
> 
> But how about specifying the base namespace, such as :
> xml:base="http://wow.sfsu.edu/ontology/rich/Resources.owl"
> 
> We should also provide some metadata which probably can be in one place
> with base namespace. If we would like to avoid seeing these
> technicalities all the time, then perhaps tab pane (#3) is not right
> thing. Then should it be done in a dialog which pops up before user
> saves ontology, or separate popup dialog, or something else? 
> 
> Thanks,
> Serguei
> 
> 
> 
> Shawn Bowers wrote:
> > 
> > I am not entirely sure what you are asking. If you could craft up some
> 
> > screen shots of what you are thinking that would really help.
> > 
> > My general opinion is that namespace names are useful (if people 
> > organize ontologies around these), namespaces (as URIs) for people to 
> > view are not and shouldn't be integrated into the graphical interface.
> 
> > If someone really wants to see them, then I would suggest using a 
> > different window (for "expert" mode) that lists namespace names and 
> > their corresponding URI.
> > 
> > Also, how do you see people using namespaces in your editor? How are
> you 
> > going to present them to a user in terms of modeling constructs? E.g.,
> 
> > are you going to view each namespace as an "ontology"? Are there 
> > operations you are planning on supporting over namespaces (like get
> all 
> > concepts from a namespace)?
> > 
> > 
> > Shawn
> > 
> > 
> > Serguei Krivov wrote:
> > 
> >> Hi All,
> >>
> >> We are getting close to graphic editing support for main owl 
> >> constructs- this was a difficult part. Now we can also think about 
> >> easy things like icons for editing toolbox and  editing metadata for 
> >> ontologies.  The later point however brings certain hard questions. 
> >> Metadata pane should contain comments, author information and 
> >> namespaces-imported, default etc. If authors info and comments could 
> >> easily go into one more side panel,  it may be not so easy with 
> >> namespaces. There are at least 3 options:
> >>
> >>  
> >>
> >> #1 Put namespaces on side panels. Pros -easy to make, cons-
> namespaces 
> >> will be wrapped since they need long field
> >>
> >> #2 Put namespaces on popup dialog. Pros- easy to make, cons -not 
> >> aesthetically appealing
> >>
> >> #3 Create tab panel. One tab contains present view , another contains
> 
> >> metadata view. Pros- aesthetically appealing, cons - perhaps may 
> >> require more work.
> >>
> >>  
> >>
> >> Would you please vote or give your suggestions. Any better option
> (#4, 
> >> #5,.)
> >>
> >>  
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> Serguei
> >>
> >>  
> >>
> >>  
> >>
> >>  
> >>
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > seek-kr-sms mailing list
> > seek-kr-sms at ecoinformatics.org
> > http://www.ecoinformatics.org/mailman/listinfo/seek-kr-sms
-- 
Ferdinando Villa, Ph.D., Associate Research Professor, Ecoinformatics
Gund Institute for Ecological Economics and Dept of Botany, Univ. of Vermont
http://ecoinformatics.uvm.edu