[Application-profiles-ig] Our element definitions

Fri Mar 20 16:52:00 GMT 2020

If the spec is small enough, we could provide brief translations into library jargon, IT jargon, semantic web jargon etc. If we did this in a lighthearted way it could drive home the fuzziness of certain categories when one abstracts to this level... Tom On Fri, Mar 20, 2020, 16:33 Karen Coyle <kcoyle at kcoyle.net> wrote: >Ah, got it! yes, the entity is a class or type or category of things,>not an individual. You gave this:>>"Entity": A metadata construct similar to a class or object type which>may form part of a description that conforms to the application profile.">>We may need to word it a bit less in terms of code-like concepts (e.g.>"object type") - maybe add something like "the thing or concept being>described." But I like the precision of your definition.>>As for base specification, that's being used in the DXWG work [1]. That>集团一直以“规范" v. "vocabulary" v. "ontology">as again we don't have settled terms for this, and it seems to depend on>the circumstance. I think it would be worth trying to write this up in>plain wording to figure out first what we *mean* and then go on to the>word-smithing. We probably will need to define a lot of terms for>ourselves and our audience in order to reach clarity. I'll see if I can>get something started.>>kc>[1]https://www.w3.org/TR/dx-prof/#Class:Profile>>On 3/20/20 7:39 AM, Phil Barker wrote:>> Sorry that I am not making myself clear. Partly that's maybe because>> what I am saying makes no sense; but my point is that it is compatible>> with the element definitions we have so far.>>>> On 20/03/2020 13:55, Karen Coyle wrote:>>>>>>>>> On 3/19/20 11:17 AM, Phil Barker wrote:>>>> Is there any expected relationship between what is in column one and>>>> something in a base specification? (understood that base>>>> specifications vary widely in what they cover) Is being an instance>>>> of (e.g.) foaf:Person enough. I'm struggling to see why someone would>>>> write an application profile for a single item.>>>>>>>> Phil>>>>>>>>>> Sorry, Phil, I'm not clear on what you mean by base specification, or>>> by single item. By "base" do you mean the vocabulary the profile is a>>> profile of?>> Yes (if there is a better term to use perhaps we should define it)>>> And by single item do you mean a profile that does not define two or>>> more entities?>>>> No, I mean a single unique thing, like Me, my half-full teacup, the>> dog-eared copy of the book I'm reading, or any real or digital world>> instance.>>>> They meet the current definition of Entity "Entity: a resource being>> described" (or an identifier for them does if you change the definition>> to be an identifer)>>>> But it makes no sense to list such things in an application profile.>> (Does it?) You don't write application profiles to describe a single>> unique instance.>>>> I think we should be more specific about what we mean by entity. I think>> (if I've understood correctly) that what you list under Entity is>> something like a Class or a Type identifier (but not exclusively in an>> RDF or OO sense), so if I had to take a shot at defining it I would>suggest:>>>> "Entity": a group of resources sharing certain characteristics. The>> application profile specifies which characteristics should be described>>如何。>>>> or maybe>>>> "Entity": A metadata construct similar to a class or object type which>> may form part of a description that conforms to the application profile.>>>> or maybe bits of both.>>>> It's entirely possible that I have misunderstood what you mean by>> entity, but unless it is sensible to list me in an application profile>> the current definition is not helping me understand what you do mean.>>>> Phil>>>>>> -->>>> Phil Barker <http://people.pjjk.net/phil>.http://people.pjjk.net/phil>> CETIS LLP <https://www.cetis.org.uk>: a cooperative consultancy for>> innovation in education technology.>> PJJK Limited <https://www.pjjk.co.uk>: technology to enhance learning;>> information systems for education.>>>> CETIS is a co-operative limited liability partnership, registered in>> England number OC399090>> PJJK Limited is registered in Scotland as a private limited company,>> number SC569282.>>>>-->Karen Coyle>kcoyle at kcoyle.nethttp://kcoyle.net>skype: kcoylenet>-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://lists.www.voudr.com/pipermail/application-profiles-ig/attachments/20200320/c17a75e6/attachment-0001.htm>