[Application-profiles-ig] Our element definitions

Fri Mar 20 16:53:18 GMT 2020

On 20/03/2020 15:32, Karen Coyle wrote: >Ah, got it! yes, the entity is a class or type or category of things,>not an individual.Great :) >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.">>我们可能需要少一点的代码-like concepts (e.g.>"object type") - maybe add something like "the thing or concept being>described."Sure. The first was an attempt at avoiding code-like concepts, but that then loses precision. Maybe merging elements of the two "Entity": A metadata construct for grouping resources that share certain characteristics, which may form part of a description that conforms to the application profile. To be honest, I am not convinced that "entity" is a good name for such things, but "Entity type" or "Entity class" may be seen as too closely tied to existing terms. Naming things is hard. Phil >But I like the precision of your definition.>>As for base specification, that's being used in the DXWG work [1].>That group has struggled with "specification" 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>>的书我读的副本,或任何意图l 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 and how.>>>>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.>>>-- Phil Barker <http://people.pjjk.net/phil>.http://people.pjjk.net/philCETIS 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. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://lists.www.voudr.com/pipermail/application-profiles-ig/attachments/20200320/98101500/attachment.htm>