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] Question about Protege 4 Renderings

Nick Drummond nick.drummond at cs.manchester.ac.uk
Mon Oct 20 03:18:45 PDT 2008


Sara,

The main reasons for using RDF/XML currently are:
- backwards/forward compatibility between OWL1 and OWL2
- if an RDF representation or interaction with RDF is critical for you
application (even then, some of the triples syntaxes could also be used)

You can find a description of the syntax here [1] (specifically [2] for the
XML spec - work in progress).

Unless you are doing really straightforward transformations on the OWL,
writing code to directly manipulate the XML tree could quickly become a
nightmare (and writing an OWL API in another language is something a lot of
people would love - I'd vote for php - but certainly non-trivial).

Nick

[1] http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/OWL_Working_Group
[2] http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/XML_Serialization


2008/10/19 Sara Paiva <sara.paiva at gmail.com>

>
> 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.
> Sara Paiva
>
>
>
> 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:
>> http://protege.stanford.edu/doc/faq.html#01a.03
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> protege-owl mailing list
>> protege-owl at lists.stanford.edu
>> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-owl
>>
>> Instructions for unsubscribing:
>> http://protege.stanford.edu/doc/faq.html#01a.03
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> protege-owl mailing list
> protege-owl at lists.stanford.edu
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-owl
>
> 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-owl/attachments/20081020/c41781f9/attachment.html>


More information about the protege-owl mailing list