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] Problems with Manchester OWL Editor

Alan Ruttenberg alanruttenberg at gmail.com
Sat Nov 20 19:17:19 PST 2010


On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 6:54 PM, Timothy Redmond <tredmond at stanford.edu> wrote:
>
>> Correct me if I am wrong, but I didn't see this problem with Protege 4.1
>> You are wrong.
>
> You are right - I was wrong.  I was very sloppy in checking things out.
>
> I think that what is needed here is better validation tools.  This
> particular item would be very easy to discover programatically.   I suspect
> the OWL api OWL 2 validator would find it.  Integrating this type of
> validation with an ontology editor is a bit less trivial but it is
> definitely in the plans.   There is a need for better validation because we
> get a fair bit of e-mail on the list with people having trouble with the
> global property hierarchy constraints.  Also we are having periodic problems
> with ontologies that do not parse under 1.0 or 2.0 because they use 1.1 rdf
> idioms.
>
> But I think it is good that the tools try to load and work with problematic
> ontologies.  We are seeing such ontologies and people want to work with
> them.  In some cases the ontology developers are explicitly resistant to
> making these ontologies OWL 2 compliant.  Logging a warning is nice but is
> often not particularly helpful.  You could also use layered error levels and
> handlers (ala Jena and Protege 3 OWL) but this is a bit ugly.

I would:

a) not disallow them while editing, for the reason you state
b) mark them in a way that lets one immediately know there is a
problem, as with unsatisfiable classes. Perhaps color them orange and
have a popup that says what the problem is.
c) Not send malformed OWL files to a reasoner. GIGO.

> I am curious how rdfs:label became an object property.  This is not clear
> yet.

Same here.

-Alan



More information about the protege-owl mailing list