[oslc-core] Comment on Vocabulary Description Vocabulary

[Arthur Ryman]

Ian,

Perhaps you are reading more into it than was intended. oslc:inverseLabel 
was introduced to solve the problem of how to display a triple in its 
flipped orientation. Suppose we have a triple S P O. Then we would 
normally display this as S label(P) O. However, suppose we are navigating 
from O. Then we display the flipped triple as O inverseLabel(P) S. Roles 
do not enter the discussion. This is purely a presentation issue.

Regards, 
___________________________________________________________________________ 

Arthur Ryman 

DE, Chief Architect, Reporting &
Portfolio and Strategy Management
IBM Software, Rational 

Toronto Lab | +1-905-413-3077 (office) | +1-416-939-5063 (mobile) 





From:   Ian Green1 <ian.green at uk.ibm.com>
To:     Arthur Ryman/Toronto/IBM at IBMCA, 
Cc:     oslc-core at open-services.net, "Oslc-Core" 
<oslc-core-bounces at open-services.net>
Date:   12/03/2013 06:34 AM
Subject:        Re: [oslc-core] Comment on Vocabulary Description 
Vocabulary



Hi Arthur 
my posting was to question the idea that oslc:inverseLabel flips the sense 
of rdfs:label. rdfs:label has no "direction" to "flip".  Only the roles 
can be flipped. 

I think we're making a conceptual error in conflating role name with 
resource label. 

best wishes,
   -ian

ian.green at uk.ibm.com (Ian Green1/UK/IBM at IBMGB)
IBM Rational 

Arthur Ryman <ryman at ca.ibm.com> wrote on 02/12/2013 19:55:08:

> From: Arthur Ryman <ryman at ca.ibm.com> 
> To: Ian Green1/UK/IBM at IBMGB, 
> Cc: oslc-core at open-services.net, "Oslc-Core" <oslc-core-
> bounces at open-services.net> 
> Date: 02/12/2013 19:54 
> Subject: Re: [oslc-core] Comment on Vocabulary Description Vocabulary 
> 
> Ian,
> 
> rdfs:label is supposed to be a human-readable string that you could 
> substitute for the URI. You might use it to label fields in a form, 
> columns in a table, or nodes and arcs in a graph. 
> 
> The oslc:inverseLabel property was motivated by the use case of a query 
> builder that navigated from resource to resource. Hence, we need a label 

> that flips the sense of rdfs:label. There was no discussion of roles.
> 
> I hope that people are not writing queries that depend on certain values 

> of rdfs:label, and that these values are retrieved "at the last minute" 
> when presenting data. This would let us improve the labels without 
> breaking anyone.
> 
> Regards, 
> 
___________________________________________________________________________ 

> 
> Arthur Ryman 
> 
> DE, Chief Architect, Reporting &
> Portfolio and Strategy Management
> IBM Software, Rational 
> 
> Toronto Lab | +1-905-413-3077 (office) | +1-416-939-5063 (mobile) 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From:   Ian Green1 <ian.green at uk.ibm.com>
> To:     oslc-core at open-services.net, 
> Date:   11/29/2013 08:18 AM
> Subject:        [oslc-core] Comment on Vocabulary Description Vocabulary
> Sent by:        "Oslc-Core" <oslc-core-bounces at open-services.net>
> 
> 
> 
> The annotation vocabulary [1] defines oslc:inverseLabel and gives some 
> examples of its use. 
> 
> It seems to me that rdfs:label and oslc:inverseLabel ought not to be 
> duals.  The RDFS spec has R rdfs:label L to mean "L is a human readable 
> label for R".  I don't think our usage of rdfs:label reflects this 
> intended usage - rather we're using the rdfs:label of the predicate to 
> designate the role the subject plays in relation to the object of the 
> link.  The idea of oslc:inverseLabel is to have something to designate 
the 
> role the object plays in relation to the subject. 
> 
> The example on the wiki is to do with query building.  The suggestion is 

> the user would see "validates" in the UI from the perspective of the 
> testcase, and they would see "validated by" from the perspective of the 
> requirement.  But in neither of these cases is the user examining the 
name 
> of the resource whose URI is oslc_rm:validatedBy.  That resource has the 

> label "validatedBy".  The query builder use case is about labelling the 
> role of the testcase in relation to the requirement (or vice versa). 
This 
> is conceptually different from the human-readable name of the predicate. 

> 
> Was this distinction discussed when the draft was being drawn up 
> (apologies if so)?  Does this distinction matter? 
> 
> I looked through the RM 2.0 vocabulary and it is the case that all of 
the 
> rdfs:labels "make sense" as a role name;  I looked at DC and most of 
those 
> also follow that pattern, but not all do.  For example, dcterms:relation 

> has the label "Relation", with the definition   "A related resource". 
I'd 
> expect the role name for such a link to be "Related To". 
> 
> Any comments? 
> 
> 
> [1] http://open-services.net/wiki/core/Vocabulary-Annotation-Vocabulary/ 

> 
> best wishes,
>    -ian
> 
> ian.green at uk.ibm.com (Ian Green1/UK/IBM at IBMGB)
> IBM Rational
> Unless stated otherwise above:
> IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 

> 741598. 
> Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 
3AU
> _______________________________________________
> Oslc-Core mailing list
> Oslc-Core at open-services.net
> http://open-services.net/mailman/listinfo/oslc-core_open-services.net
> 
> 

Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 
741598. 
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU