You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
With reusable domain modules that can be imported by other domains, there could be well-known or built-in domain modules, e.g., for numerical datatypes, for defining the type for actions, and for defining the types for datasets such as knowledgebases or graphs.
Any thoughts on these topics?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
We might want to look into package management technologies, including package formats, their metadata, and their manifest files, while considering how best to allow teams of content authors to create reusable, interrelated, and interdependent domain modules. This would be particularly useful when domain modules could, like software libraries and components, be versioned or editioned independently of one another.
Also, I recently found Plow, a "package management solution for OWL ontologies, with support for specifying dependencies between packages via SemVer ranges."
This issue is about reusable domain modules, supporting and enabling the capability for domains to import, include, or reference one another.
With reusable domain modules that can be imported by other domains, there could be well-known or built-in domain modules, e.g., for numerical datatypes, for defining the type for actions, and for defining the types for datasets such as knowledgebases or graphs.
Any thoughts on these topics?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: