Search Mailing List Archives
[protege-discussion] [protege-owl] Problem loading ontology
tudorache at stanford.edu
Wed Mar 5 18:25:24 PST 2008
No need to double post your messages.
Protege 3 cannot load arbitrary OWL Full ontologies. If you run the earl
ontology through the WonderWeb OWL Validator
(http://www.mygrid.org.uk/OWL/Validator), you will get many warnings and
see that it is OWL Full. One thing that is not supported in Protege 3 is
the untyped resources (i.e. resources that are referenced but do not
have a type declaration) and according to the validator, there are many
Rui Lopes wrote:
> Hi all,
> I have encountered a strange error while loading an OWL ontology. This
> error occurs both by opening it from a local copy in my computer, or
> importing it from the Web into another ontology. The ontology in
> question is EARL (Evaluation and Report Language 1.0 Schema), as
> currently being standardised by the W3C.
> The ontology location (and namespace) is http://www.w3.org/ns/earl#,
> whereas the current state of the spec can be found at
> The error in question is as follows: (if required, I can post later the
> full exception stack as seen in the logs.)
> There were errors at performing operation.
> 1. Exception class java.lang.RuntimeException.
> Message: Illegal superclass DefaultRDFList(@_:A181 of
> [DefaultOWLNamedClass(rdf:List, FrameID(0:9109 0))]) of p1:Assertion has
> type class edu.stanford.smi.protegex.owl.model.impl.DefaultRDFList
> 2. Errors at loading OWL file from
> Please consider running the file through an RDF or OWL validation
> service such as:
> - RDF Validator: http://www.w3.org/RDF/Validator
> - OWL Validator: http://phoebus.cs.man.ac.uk:9999/OWL/Validator
> See console and log for more details.
> I have successfully validated the ontology in the two suggested services
> (RDF and OWL validators). Moreover, I was able to use Jena
> programmatically to create an OWL ontology, append an OWL import
> construct pointing to http://www.w3.org/ns/earl#, serialise it to XML,
> query it through SPARQL successfully, etc. Therefore, it seems to me,
> imho, that it might be something weird happening in Protege.
> However, the way the ontology has been specified is a bit unusual, since
> it uses OWL constructs only when there's no equivalent in rdf/rdfs
> (e.g., rdfs:Class, no owl:Ontology, etc.).
> This bug/feature has been reproduced both in Protege stable (3.3.1) and
> beta (3.4), both behind proxy/firewall and open Internet environments.
> I'm using Protege in a Mac OS X 10.5.2 with 1Gb of RAM.
> Is this a known bug of Protege? Is it a problem with the way the
> ontology has been specified (if so, it should be reported to W3C's
> respective WG)? Or is it something else incorrect from my side?
> Please feel free to ask for more information, if required. Thanks in
> advance for the help!
> protege-owl mailing list
> protege-owl at lists.stanford.edu
> Instructions for unsubscribing: http://protege.stanford.edu/doc/faq.html#01a.03
More information about the protege-discussion