Search Mailing List Archives


Limit search to: Subject & Body Subject Author
Sort by: Reverse Sort
Limit to: All This Week Last Week This Month Last Month
Select Date Range     through    

[protege-discussion] uri, frames, owl or not

Timothy Redmond tredmond at stanford.edu
Mon Aug 2 09:46:02 PDT 2010


An ontology does not  have to be published and the URI you choose 
doesn't  have to be web based.  The URI you choose can simply  be a name 
for the ontology.  There are some words in the OWL 2 specification that 
an ontology  "should" be  accessible through its IRI but in other places 
it is implicitly understood that this is not a reliable mechanism.

-Timothy


On 08/02/2010 09:36 AM, Richard Bogosian wrote:
> I am new to Protege and have a question regarding Frames and OWL 
> versions. I downloaded what I believed to be Protege-Frames 4.1 Beta. 
> When I run the program, it insists that I create a new OWL or select 
> an existing OWL ontology. The part that bothers me is that when I 
> select "create new", I am forced to provide a web-based uri. What if I 
> don't want to publish anything to the internet. Is there some way 
> around this requirement? If I am working on proprietary information, I 
> won't want to risk putting it on any website. I am going thru the 
> documentation but so far I've seen nothing that addresses this issue.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> protege-discussion mailing list
> protege-discussion at lists.stanford.edu
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-discussion
>
> Instructions for unsubscribing: http://protege.stanford.edu/doc/faq.html#01a.03
>    

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.stanford.edu/pipermail/protege-discussion/attachments/20100802/307b3da6/attachment.html>


More information about the protege-discussion mailing list