Search Mailing List Archives
[protege-owl] Unique cannonical serialization (using Subversion or some such)
tudorache at stanford.edu
Thu Mar 19 15:59:48 PDT 2009
Thank you very much, Thomas, for looking into this!
If this is a feature that is useful to several people in the community,
then, we could add it in the patch release.
Thomas Russ wrote:
> On Mar 18, 2009, at 4:14 PM, Tania Tudorache wrote:
>> I'm wondering if Eric forgot to check the "Sort alphabetically" check
>> box. That would explain the many differences when using the native
> Hmmm. Looking at some of our results, it seems that the real issue is
> that the sorting is only at the top level. So that while the class
> definitions and the individuals will be in the sam relative position,
> property values will not necessarily preserve their order. I suspect
> that may also be true for restrictions on classes, but I didn't check
> For individuals, the properties are not in alphabetical order, and
> neither are the values if a single property has multiple values.
> I'm not suggesting that this be done, but if one wanted to have a
> canonical serialization, then there would need to be more levels at
> which sorting would need to happen.
> protege-owl mailing list
> protege-owl at lists.stanford.edu
> Instructions for unsubscribing: http://protege.stanford.edu/doc/faq.html#01a.03
More information about the protege-owl