Search Mailing List Archives
[protege-owl] Question about Protege 4 Renderings
sara.paiva at gmail.com
Sun Oct 19 07:29:37 PDT 2008
I didn´t want to use JAVA.. so i was thinking of making a simple API in
another language of my convenience in the work i´m developing.
That´s the reason.
Still remains the questions:
1) advantages/disadvantages of making the rendering in either ways. What´s
the big difference of making a given ontology and then rend in RDF or OWL.
What is the difference?
2) Is there a specification of how the representation is done?
Thanks in advance.
On Sat, Oct 18, 2008 at 8:23 PM, James Howison <james at howison.name> wrote:
> I'm certain there are good reasons, but perhaps you help me understand
> when it's useful to process RDF as XML (as opposed to using a library
> like Jena/Redland to process it as RDF?). For example can one use
> XLST to transform it (and is that easier than working programmatically
> with the RDF statements serialized in the XML)?
> On 18 Oct 2008, at 2:11 PM, Sara Paiva wrote:
> > Good afternoon,
> > i am working with Protégé 4 now and i see there is the possibity of
> > rendering the ontology in several formats. I am interested in XML
> > format so
> > that leaves me with RDF/XML or OWL/XML.
> > I would like to know the advantages/disadvantages of making the
> > rendering in
> > either ways.
> > If i want to process the XML file that represents the ontology, is
> > there any
> > specification of how the rendering in both cases is done?
> > I appreciate any help on this matter.
> > Thanks in advance
> > Sara Paiva
> > _______________________________________________
> > protege-owl mailing list
> > protege-owl at lists.stanford.edu
> > https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-owl
> > Instructions for unsubscribing:
> protege-owl mailing list
> protege-owl at lists.stanford.edu
> Instructions for unsubscribing:
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the protege-owl