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-owl] Strange behavior of URI (URN) in namespace

Tania Tudorache tudorache at
Tue May 6 13:02:42 PDT 2008


The next beta build will contain a complete reimplementation of the 
namespace mechanism. URNs will be supported much better. The bug you are 
talking about will be fixed.

If you could send me an ontology that contains URN, I can check whether 
the new code behaves as expected. If there are any issues, I will be 
able to fix them before the release of the next beta. I've done several 
testing with URN and the code worked fine. But, more testing never hurts :)


Jose H. REMY wrote:
> Hi,
> I use a registered URI (URN) as namespace identifier, Because Uniqueness is
> not a question for URN, and because they are not dereferenceable, I don't
> like the idea putting a "#" or a "/" at the end of the URN
> It seems it is required by Protégé (I use 3.4Beta130) , but Protégé tends to
> complete the URN default name space by a ":". When the related ontology is
> imported elsewhere, Protégé creates a "pi" suffix with the related URN
> terminating with a ":". If one tries to modify this prefix Protégé crashes. 
> As a workaround it is necessary to create a prefix with a corresponding URN
> terminating with a "#". This allows related prefix to be processed correctly
> (displayed in class listing)in new ontology (having imports). BUT protégé
> still add a "p1" prefix with related URN that WILL NOT BE USED. In the owl
> file, xmlns elements are correct, BUT default prefix for a class is the
> default URN full value (not the defined prefix)
> It seems to me that URI (URN) namespace processing should reviewed.
> Jose H. REMY
> ---------------------
> _______________________________________________
> protege-owl mailing list
> protege-owl at
> Instructions for unsubscribing: 

More information about the protege-owl mailing list