Commons Ontology Library Avatar
  1. OMG Specification

Commons Ontology Library — Open Issues

  • Acronym: COMMONS
  • Issues Count: 14
  • Description: Issues not resolved
Open Closed All
Issues not resolved

Issues Summary

Key Issue Reported Fixed Disposition Status
COMMONS-26 Revise the definition of designation to better align with the latest version of ISO 1087 COMMONS 1.0b1 open
COMMONS-12 The properties in the collections ontology are confusing to users COMMONS 1.0b1 open
COMMONS-18 There needs to be an additional usage note on Text in the TextDatatype ontology with a stronger warning COMMONS 1.0b1 open
COMMONS-16 Revise the abbreviation for the AboutCommons "make file COMMONS 1.0b1 open
COMMONS-19 CodeSet should be a subclass of arrangement COMMONS 1.0b1 open
COMMONS-11 Need to be able to indicate whether or not something can only be classified by a single classifier from a specific scheme COMMONS 1.0a1 open
COMMONS-3 The format of the tables throughout the specification needs improvement COMMONS 1.0a1 open
COMMONS-2 The terms and definitions section of the Commons Ontology Library is incomplete COMMONS 1.0a1 open
COMMONS-14 Revise the version IRI for all of the Commons ontologies to agree for finalization purposes COMMONS 1.0a1 open
COMMONS-5 Examples are needed to help explain to Commons users how to use the ontologies COMMONS 1.0a1 open
COMMONS-4 Some of the diagrams in Clause 8 are difficult to read COMMONS 1.0a1 open
COMMONS-9 The constraint on a classifier that says it must classify something is too restrictive COMMONS 1.0a1 open
COMMONS-1 The use of rdfs:isDefinedBy is inconsistent in the annotation vocabulary COMMONS 1.0a1 open
COMMONS-6 Some of the commons ontologies include double spaces in annotations COMMONS 1.0a1 open

Issues Descriptions

Revise the definition of designation to better align with the latest version of ISO 1087

  • Key: COMMONS-26
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Thematix Partners LLC ( Elisa Kendall)
  • Summary:

    The definitions of designation and name need some additional work and don't align with the ISO definitions as well as they should. The definition of designation needs clarification and the definition of name should state that it is not linguistically neutral per its usage in the standard. Also, even if we clarify name, we probably don't want it to be disjoint with identifier as it is now (needs further discussion).

  • Reported: COMMONS 1.0b1 — Thu, 1 Sep 2022 16:34 GMT
  • Updated: Thu, 1 Sep 2022 16:34 GMT

The properties in the collections ontology are confusing to users

  • Key: COMMONS-12
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Thematix Partners LLC ( Elisa Kendall)
  • Summary:

    Users are confused as to whether they need comprises or hasConstituent or hasMember or hasPart.

    In order to address this, we need to augment some of the properties with disjointness, such as between comprises and hasPart. Then we need to make clear that membership involves discrete elements and constituency may or may not involve discrete elements. hasConstituent can be used with cardinality constraints whereas hasPart cannot be due to OWL reasoning constraints.

  • Reported: COMMONS 1.0b1 — Fri, 12 Aug 2022 19:13 GMT
  • Updated: Fri, 26 Aug 2022 00:46 GMT
  • Attachments:

There needs to be an additional usage note on Text in the TextDatatype ontology with a stronger warning

  • Key: COMMONS-18
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Thematix Partners LLC ( Elisa Kendall)
  • Summary:

    This datatype is quite useful but most free and some commercial OWL tools don't support (1) custom datatypes in OWL, and (2) rdf:langString. We need to provide a stronger warning to users who might want to extend Text with the inherent risk in doing so depending on their application and tool infrastructure.

  • Reported: COMMONS 1.0b1 — Sat, 20 Aug 2022 22:51 GMT
  • Updated: Fri, 26 Aug 2022 00:46 GMT
  • Attachments:

Revise the abbreviation for the AboutCommons "make file

  • Key: COMMONS-16
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Thematix Partners LLC ( Elisa Kendall)
  • Summary:

    The AboutCommons.rdf file is a convenience file that can be used to load all of the ontologies into ontology editors such as Protege, triple stores, and other applications. The namespace prefix for this ontology does not conform to the others in terms of its structure, however. It is currently "abt-cmns" and should be "cmns-abt".

  • Reported: COMMONS 1.0b1 — Sat, 20 Aug 2022 02:25 GMT
  • Updated: Fri, 26 Aug 2022 00:46 GMT
  • Attachments:

CodeSet should be a subclass of arrangement

  • Key: COMMONS-19
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Thematix Partners LLC ( Elisa Kendall)
  • Summary:

    This is a gap, as classification scheme and identification scheme are both already subclasses of arrangement.

  • Reported: COMMONS 1.0b1 — Sat, 20 Aug 2022 23:10 GMT
  • Updated: Fri, 26 Aug 2022 00:46 GMT
  • Attachments:

Need to be able to indicate whether or not something can only be classified by a single classifier from a specific scheme

  • Key: COMMONS-11
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Thematix Partners LLC ( Elisa Kendall)
  • Summary:

    This is not expressible in OWL, easily. One option would be to create a boolean that indicates this is the case, which perhaps a rule engine for data quality, or sparql, or a SHACL shape could then test. What you really want to be able to say is that 'is classified by' can only have one value from a given classification scheme when applied to something.

    This is a change to the Classfiers ontology, which may impact that section of the specification.

  • Reported: COMMONS 1.0a1 — Fri, 5 Aug 2022 18:37 GMT
  • Updated: Fri, 26 Aug 2022 00:46 GMT
  • Attachments:

The format of the tables throughout the specification needs improvement

  • Key: COMMONS-3
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Thematix Partners LLC ( Elisa Kendall)
  • Summary:

    (1) Different fonts: I can understand why you are using a fixed-width font in the metadata tables to identify the right-hand columns as the actual values of the terms listed in the left column.
    In the Properties tables I suggest to use a sans-serif font (e.g. Ariel) for the Axioms column to clearly distinguish the Axioms from the Annotations
    (2) The Properties tables are too cramped. It is not clear what the purpose of the name repetitions in parentheses in the Name column is. However, these repetitions take up unnecessarily much horizontal space. This could be solved by always moving them in a line under the bold camel-case name. The recovered horizontal space should be then allocated to the Axioms column, which is way too narrow. Many axioms are mutilated by inappropriate line breaks.
    (3) Since you are not using vertical separators (which is ok), you should extend the gutter whitespace between columns to improve readability, in particular between Annotation and Axiom columns.
    (4) Clause 6 should contain good explanations regarding the fonts and the table layouts [and the parenthesis names].

  • Reported: COMMONS 1.0a1 — Fri, 1 Jul 2022 18:45 GMT
  • Updated: Fri, 26 Aug 2022 00:46 GMT

The terms and definitions section of the Commons Ontology Library is incomplete

  • Key: COMMONS-2
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Thematix Partners LLC ( Elisa Kendall)
  • Summary:

    This section defines ontology, but none of the other key terms that are present in any of the ontologies. It should be revised to incorporate at least some of the basic definitions that are present in the ontology files.

  • Reported: COMMONS 1.0a1 — Fri, 1 Jul 2022 18:40 GMT
  • Updated: Fri, 26 Aug 2022 00:46 GMT

Revise the version IRI for all of the Commons ontologies to agree for finalization purposes

  • Key: COMMONS-14
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Thematix Partners LLC ( Elisa Kendall)
  • Summary:

    This issue involves updating the version IRIs for all of the ontologies to be 20220801 for finalization

  • Reported: COMMONS 1.0a1 — Sat, 20 Aug 2022 00:19 GMT
  • Updated: Tue, 23 Aug 2022 03:04 GMT

Examples are needed to help explain to Commons users how to use the ontologies

  • Key: COMMONS-5
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Thematix Partners LLC ( Elisa Kendall)
  • Summary:

    There are no examples in the specification itself, which are needed to assist both library implementers and users of the ontologies.

  • Reported: COMMONS 1.0a1 — Fri, 1 Jul 2022 19:03 GMT
  • Updated: Sat, 20 Aug 2022 00:57 GMT

Some of the diagrams in Clause 8 are difficult to read

  • Key: COMMONS-4
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Thematix Partners LLC ( Elisa Kendall)
  • Summary:

    All these diagrams, with the exception of Figure 9, have too small symbols and text. It would be very easy to reduce the width of those diagrams by reorganizing the content a little, this would allow larger magnification of the images.

  • Reported: COMMONS 1.0a1 — Fri, 1 Jul 2022 18:47 GMT
  • Updated: Sat, 20 Aug 2022 00:56 GMT

The constraint on a classifier that says it must classify something is too restrictive

  • Key: COMMONS-9
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Thematix Partners LLC ( Elisa Kendall)
  • Summary:

    Classification schemes should be able to be defined without necessarily referring to all of the things that they classify. For example, one should be able to encode industry classifiers without having to know exactly what those classifiers apply to. Thus, the constraint that a classifier classifies some thing should be loosened to be min 0, meaning 'may'.

    This issue affects the Classifiers ontology, only

  • Reported: COMMONS 1.0a1 — Thu, 14 Jul 2022 21:44 GMT
  • Updated: Sun, 7 Aug 2022 00:00 GMT
  • Attachments:

The use of rdfs:isDefinedBy is inconsistent in the annotation vocabulary

  • Key: COMMONS-1
  • Status: open  
  • Source: Thematix Partners LLC ( Elisa Kendall)
  • Summary:

    In the annotation vocabulary machine-readable file, the use of rdfs:isDefinedBy is inconsistent. For reified elements for Dublin Core annotations, we use the Qname / abbreviated IRI to link to the source. For reified elements for the Simple Knowledge Organization System (SKOS), we use the full IRI. And, we have not included rdfs:isDefinedBy for any of our local annotation declarations.

    The latter is probably ok, but we should normalize the references for Dublin Core and SKOS to all use the same approach.

    This issue was raised by Richard Beatch in his AB review.

  • Reported: COMMONS 1.0a1 — Fri, 1 Jul 2022 18:25 GMT
  • Updated: Sun, 7 Aug 2022 00:00 GMT
  • Attachments:

Some of the commons ontologies include double spaces in annotations