OASIS 1st Annual Review – Revision of Deliverable D1.1.1

OASIS 1st Technical Annual Review

Revision of D1.1.1 - Actions taken to address review report recommendations

No. / Recommendation or comment / Action(s) taken to address this recommendation or comment
R1 / The report gives an overview of existing ontologies for each application domain (transport, tourism, social services, etc.) after thorough testing so as to form the basis of the OASIS Hyper Ontology. Additionally, it is recommended to clearly position in this document the use case partners and their particular involvement in the choice of ontologies, tools, and methods, but also their role in the management of ontologies. This information is currently partly distributed in related deliverables. Involvement of the use case partners is required to identify innovative objectives such as evolution, collaboration, but also to align better the scope of the Hyper Ontology in terms of the pilots. /
  • A new section 2.1 was added that describes the process of gathering ontology relevant information by SP2, SP3 partners and the resulted outcome of this process.
  • Relevant information from D2.1.1 and D3.1.1 has been included in Section 2.1
  • New projects were added

R2 / The report gives an overview of diverse representation languages, reasoners, and tools. However, regarding the spent resources (33PMs) and relevance for the objectives of the project, the document should include a critical survey of ontology management methodologies. Ontology management methodology does not have merely impact on the configuration of tools and the ontology representation framework, but also on the social arrangement of roles and responsibilities on the involved ontology management activities. There is a plethora of literature from related FP6 and FP7 European projects that should be updated and positioned properly here. /
  • A new chapter was added, after current chapter 2, which describes the state-of-the-art on ontology management methodologies. Comparison tables are also included at the end of chapter. Input for this new chapter (no. 3) has been gathered from literature found in related FP6 and FP7 European projects.

R3 / Both tool-wise as methodology-wise collaborative ontology evolution/versioning aspects are almost not considered in the current version of the document. Evolution aspects were discussed partly for SWOOP, but could not be found back in the comparison table. Also multi-user ontology editing was mentioned a few times, but it is not clear how it differentiates with collaborative ontology editing. For example, multi-user editing can be regarded as multiple parallel single-user processes on disjoint parts of the ontology, while collaborative editing can be regarded as working, and agreeing on shared parts in order to satisfy a well-established set of semantic interoperability requirements. /
  • We updated chapter 6 (previously 5), in order to include information on versioning and evolution for all reported tools. Moreover, support for multi-user versus collaborative editing has been mentioned.
  • We enhanced section 6.20 by including a discussion on the above issues.
  • A new comparison table 18 was added that address versioning and collaborative editing attributes.

R4 / Regarding the ontology language survey, it is suggested to consider, as opposed to those currently presented in the survey, attribute-free approaches (e.g., NIAM/ORM, conceptualgraph theory) and compare their potential for coping with semiotic differences, usability, reusability and semantic stability in view of ontology evolution. /
  • New section 5.5 was added about attribute-free approaches.

R5 / The tool survey only reviews 18 “popular and accepted” ontology authoring tools. This choice should be motivated properly, and it should be explained why its relevance also would hold in the context of OASIS. /
  • Chapter 6 (previously 5) was updated by the addition of an introductory paragraph that justifies the selection of the 18 presented tools.
  • We have included tables 15-18 at the end of this chapter that replace the comparison table in Annex 1 (which has been removed) with more details on the attributes of the presented tools.

R6 / It should be indicated to which extent the algorithms for restructuring and refining as presented in the report are implemented and validated. /
  • We updated chapter 4 (previously 3) by adding more details on the implementation and validation of the restructuring and refining process (in Section 3.3).
  • We updated Section 3.4 “Conclusions” with respect to the new content.
  • We have added tables 9-12 that show detailed results of the restructuring process in a quantitative manner. These tables are used for evaluation of the applied restructuring algorithms.

R7 / More elaboration is required on how state-of-the-art tools, methodologies, and languages support the metrics suggested in the document. /
  • Chapter 4 has been updated by including a new section 4.2 about metrics and their support by language and tools.
  • Chapter 3 has been updated by the addition of more details on how the proposed metrics are supported by state-of-the-art Ontology Management Methodologies.
  • Two new tables 3, 4 have been added that include information about in what extend suggested metrics are supported by state-of-the-art tools.

R8 / It seems that CASL will have an important role in SP1 but it is not clear how this choice will affect the design of the COF. /
  • New section 5.3 has been added that describes the role of CASL and HETS in COF.
  • Section 6.20 has been updated in this respect.

R9 / From the review presentation, we learn that there is a wiki and one is planning to extend the role of wiki as a useful tool in the collaborative management of the ontology. However this was not reported yet in the deliverable. /
  • Section 6.18 has been updated.
  • A paragraph that refers to wiki and work planned to be delivered in ID1.2.2 is included in chapter 8.

R10 / It (the deliverable) positions the state of
the art only partly and from the consecutive analysis it is not clear how state of the art will be advanced in this project. /
  • A new paragrgaph has been added in chapter 8 that discusses how OASIS advances state-of-the-art.

Page 1 of 2