Search Mailing List Archives
[protege-discussion] Maintaining ontologies
gjogleka at purdue.edu
Fri Nov 11 06:38:38 PST 2011
Thank you very much for the pointers. I will certainly study the papers.
A quick glance revealed that they are all 2011 publications. I am
surprised to find that with so much work going on in semantic web where
ontologies serve at the key building blocks, there is not much available
to address the migration issue. Have people done it mostly the hard way
in the past, or have they done it right the first time?
Does this mean that the plug-ins are available only for 4.0? Should I
migrate to 4.0? How will the move impact the current code I have? How
different is the Manchester API from Protege's OWL-API?
Thanks again for your help.
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 16:10:33 -0800
From: Matthew Horridge<matthew.horridge at stanford.edu>
To: User support for Core Protege and the Protege-Frames editor
<protege-discussion at lists.stanford.edu>
Subject: Re: [protege-discussion] maintaining ontologies
Message-ID:<98910718-1747-472F-B176-799A62A416CF at stanford.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
This is quite a big topic. There is quite a lot of research on ontology
versioning and evolution and a fair number of tools that support tasks
related to these topics. Here are some things related to Protege 4....
Some recent work, that is very nice, is work by Rafael Gon?alves at the
university of Manchester - he looks at analysing changes between
different versions of ontologies. Here's a pointer to various
publications on this:
Timothy Redmond and Natasha Noy have also done some recent work in this
area and have produced a Protege 4 plugin. Here's their paper
and here's their plugin
There's also the OWLDiff plugin:
In terms of versioning with SVN, there were some recent posts on the
Protege mailing lists about this. A search through the archives should
reveal some interesting posts.
More information about the protege-discussion