Search Mailing List Archives
[protege-owl] Best Practice for multilingual ontologies
swartik at ida.org
Wed Sep 20 08:42:23 PDT 2006
I agree with your idea about modularization. I am curious to know why
you would have myOntology-??.owl import myOntology.owl, rather than the
other way around. If myOntology.owl imports myOntology-en.owl,
myOntology-fr.owl, etc. then everyone can reference a single URI, yet
still have access to the ontology in their preferred language.
Olivier Dameron wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 11:53:02 +0200, "Schentz Herbert"
> <herbert.schentz at umweltbundesamt.at> wrote:
>> In OWL there are a lot of different possibilities to express
>> multilingual ontologies. Is there any best practice for that use
>> case ?
> I am not sure if it is a best practice, but I would tend to
> modularize as much as possible:
> - you ontology in one file (or several, with one that imports
> everything): eg myOntology.owl
> - each language-specific in a separate file that imports the ontology
> one: myOntology-en.owl, myOntology-fr.owl, myOntology-de.owl, ... each
> one imports myOntology.owl
> my 0.02euros
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the protege-owl