Search Mailing List Archives
[protege-owl] Variations in owl output of actual identical ontologies
tral at minet.uni-jena.de
Thu Aug 9 06:26:22 PDT 2007
I found a interim solution for "normalising" owl files in order to get
better results from CVS diff.
I use cwm
for this purpose. A single run of
python cwm.py --rdf <protege-output.owl> > <canonical-version.owl>
produces a normalised owl file, i.e. the entries are sorted in always
the same way and have the same inner structure.
Then I put this normalised files under CVS...
Nick Drummond wrote:
>> There is an option in Protege 3.2.1:
>> OWL/Preferences/"RDF/XML Writer Settings"
>> where you can choose between the Jena writer and an "Experimental
> This was an attempt to "regularise" the ordering etc somewhat and may
> be enough to help you with your problems.
> To deal with versioning properly, we need structural (or semantic?)
> diff tools that ignore the syntax.
>> In Protege 4 I didn't found this option. Which writer will
>> Protege 4 use? Will it be the (completed) "native" one? There is no
>> statement about this in the Rlease Notes
> All of the serialisation is done by the OWLAPI .
>  http://owlapi.sourceforge.net/
> protege-owl mailing list
> protege-owl at lists.stanford.edu
> Instructions for unsubscribing: http://protege.stanford.edu/doc/faq.html#01a.03
Institut fuer Informatik
D-07743 Jena, Germany
EMBL-EBI, Wellcome-Trust Genome Campus
CB10 1SD, UK
e-mail: tral at informatik.uni-jena.de
PGP Key-ID: 0xC3329342
PGP Public Key:
Fingerprint 5656 7F57 8E58 FC7B AC58 6714 3DA4 3181 C332 9342
More information about the protege-owl