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] duplicate names reg

Csongor Nyulas csongor.nyulas at stanford.edu
Thu Jun 20 00:30:10 PDT 2013


Hi Kala Devi,

I am afraid I don't understand what you men by names and duplicate 
names. Maybe you can reformulate your question and explain us what you 
try, and fail, to do.

For your information, identifiers in an ontology are unique (see URIs, 
IRIs). You can't reuse the same URI to identify two different entities, 
including entities of different kind, such as a class and a property. 
You can, however, use annotation properties on any entity (class, 
property or individual) to specify display names. The display names can 
be the same on different entities, although it may be confusing to deal 
with such ontologies. Also, it is recommended as a good practice that 
names of classes start with upper case letters, while names of 
properties start with lower case letters.

I hope this helps,
Csongor

On 06/19/2013 08:54 PM, kala devi ramar wrote:
> Dear all
> In the given ontology space is allowed between names and duplicate 
> names are used in classes and properties. please tell me how it s 
> possible?. it is very urgent for me
> thank u
> R.kaladevi
>
> --- On *Thu, 6/20/13, protege-discussion-request at lists.stanford.edu 
> /<protege-discussion-request at lists.stanford.edu>/* wrote:
>
>
>     From: protege-discussion-request at lists.stanford.edu
>     <protege-discussion-request at lists.stanford.edu>
>     Subject: protege-discussion Digest, Vol 83, Issue 14
>     To: protege-discussion at lists.stanford.edu
>     Date: Thursday, June 20, 2013, 12:34 AM
>
>     Send protege-discussion mailing list submissions to
>     protege-discussion at lists.stanford.edu
>     <http://us.mc1625.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=protege-discussion@lists.stanford.edu>
>
>     To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>     https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-discussion
>     or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>     protege-discussion-request at lists.stanford.edu
>     <http://us.mc1625.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=protege-discussion-request@lists.stanford.edu>
>
>     You can reach the person managing the list at
>     protege-discussion-owner at lists.stanford.edu
>     <http://us.mc1625.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=protege-discussion-owner@lists.stanford.edu>
>
>     When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>     than "Re: Contents of protege-discussion digest..."
>
>
>     Today's Topics:
>
>        1. RMI server scalability for Protege Frames 3.5 editor (John
>     Pierre)
>
>
>     ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>     Message: 1
>     Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 10:26:57 -0700
>     From: John Pierre <johnmapierre at gmail.com
>     <http://us.mc1625.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=johnmapierre@gmail.com>>
>     To: protege-discussion at lists.stanford.edu
>     <http://us.mc1625.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=protege-discussion@lists.stanford.edu>
>     Subject: [protege-discussion] RMI server scalability for Protege
>         Frames 3.5    editor
>     Message-ID:
>        
>     <CADwK6dw9iyKYj4h=XqJu_fxiDyMuB5ny1vahGxHYqO84xyjUxg at mail.gmail.com <http://us.mc1625.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=XqJu_fxiDyMuB5ny1vahGxHYqO84xyjUxg@mail.gmail.com>>
>     Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
>     We are trying to set up a collaborative installation so multiple
>     developers
>     can edit a Frames ontology.  The ontology currently has about
>     25,000 frames.
>
>     We have successfully configured the RMI server and can connect
>     clients to
>     the server and access the example ontologies across the network.
>
>     The problem is that our 25,000 frame ontology isn't able to load
>     into the
>     clients when accessed across the network.
>
>     Our ontology is MySQL backed.
>
>     The ontology loads fine when accessed on the same machine without
>     going
>     through the rmi server.
>
>     The ontology loads but takes several minutes to do so when running the
>     client and server on the same machine through the localhost loopback.
>
>     The ontology loading hangs and cannot load when running the client and
>     server on different machines either on a wide area network
>     (20+Mbps) nor on
>     a local area Ethernet network (100+Mbps).  After waiting 30 mins
>     or so we
>     get broken pipes and/or timed out connections.
>
>     The ontology loads if the MySQL database is accessed across the
>     network
>     directly without using the client-server (.pprj file is on the
>     client side
>     but points to a MySQL database hosted on the network)
>
>     Therefore the culprit seems to be network demands of the rmi server.
>
>     We have  -Dserver.use.compression=true turned on at the server.
>
>     We've tried -Dserver.client.preload.skip=true on the client side.
>
>
>     It seems this 25,000 frame ontology might be too large for the RMI
>     client-server architecture, but the Protege documentation seems to
>     hint
>     that much larger ontologies have been developed using Protege.
>
>     Questions:
>
>     1. What is the practical scalability limit of the Protege RMI
>     client-server
>     in terms of ontology size?
>
>     2.  Are there additional configuration settings that we can try to
>     get our
>     ontology to load?
>
>     3.  Are there other collaboration models we could try for allowing
>     multiple
>     people to work on a large scale Frames ontology besides the rmi
>     client-server approach?
>
>     Thanks in advance for your help.
>
>     John
>     -------------- next part --------------
>     An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>     URL:
>     <http://mailman.stanford.edu/pipermail/protege-discussion/attachments/20130619/5d912189/attachment-0001.html>
>
>     ------------------------------
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     protege-discussion mailing list
>     protege-discussion at lists.stanford.edu
>     <http://us.mc1625.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=protege-discussion@lists.stanford.edu>
>     https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-discussion
>
>
>     End of protege-discussion Digest, Vol 83, Issue 14
>     **************************************************
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20130620/8e231952/attachment.html>


More information about the protege-discussion mailing list