Issue 601: publish research questions on the website
In the 53rd CIDOC CRM & 46th FRBRoo SIG meeting, the Sig appointed the team at FORTH to come up with a proposal re where to publish the following sources that analyze research questions, in a way that leaves no room for ambiguity re what counts as a research question.
- the Analysis of Scientific Questions in Archaeology somewhere on the CIDOC CRM website
- the research questions that the modelling in SeaLit provides an answer to
- The CRM Requirements Analysis (described in the deliverable for the Chios Project) –and the document where the questions are listed.
- the PhD Dissertation by Stephen Hennicke (the research questions he used).
HW: FORTH to make a proposal (PF, ETs, AS, CB) –Important theories that now sits empty, or Use cases, or Scope (under “About & Info”) or something else (new)?
Post by Eleni Tsouloucha (9 September 2022)
Please take a moment to review FORTHs HW for Issue 601 .
In the 54th CIDOC CRM & 47th FRBR/LRMoo SIG Meeting, the SIG reviewed HW by FORTH -a proposal re. where the documents showcasing methodological principles motivating particular modelling decisions should appear on the site.
The proposal was that the documents be accessed on The Model\Use & Learn\Methodology\Ontology Engineering Methodology (in underscore, the new link on the website).
As the identified documents fall under different categories (based on formal criteria), they will be classified as Resources\References, Resources\Technical Papers and Resources\Publications, respectively and they will also appear as links in the new subsite under Methodology.
- Some explanatory text is needed as an introduction to the “Ontology Engineering Methodology” subsite. HW has to be assigned.
- Alternative places to consider for the new link to appear under: The Model\User Guidance\Ontology Engineering Methodology (new link in underscore).
- The documents should be made prominent on the site.
NO Decision. FORTH to revise the proposal.
Rome, September 2022
In the 55th joint meeting of the CIDOC CRM and SO/TC46/SC4/WG9; 48th FRBR/LRMoo SIG meeting, the SIG reviewed HW by FORTH.
Proposal for a new link on the site where methodological documents should appear under. Details (mock-up for methodology landing page) here.
- The scientific research questions are an empirical source in support of the methodology observed. This is not evident from lumping together all sorts of methodological documents and not specifying how they should be used or what purpose they serve.
- Either have a separate subsite just for scientific research questions and a separate one for methodology, or if they are both found in the same page, then they should be separated by some delimiter –could be a horizontal line in a tabular representation.
- Splitting up the page in two and adding a subtitle to the research questions bit along the lines of: “Research questions in support of the methodology for modelling ontologies” could do the trick. This way, navigating the site does not become way too complicated through the addition of multiple links
- An overall text that describes what Methodology is about is needed too.
- “Presentation date” is plainly wrong for Dissertations, published papers etc. It should either be Release Date or just Date. Needs to be checked for all the resources published on the site.
Way to move forward:
- FORTH to present a new mock-up link under Methodology, where the empirical data in support of the methodology (a.k.a. “Scientific research questions”) will appear separate from the guidelines for bottom-up modelling.
- Add to this set the questions used in the Notre Dame restauration project –supplied by AG (see issue 587).
- FORTH to reconsider the “Presentation Date” labels that are used throughout the site
Belval, December 2022