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] Managing Annotation Properties in P4

Alan Ruttenberg alanruttenberg at gmail.com
Mon Nov 29 14:38:55 PST 2010


On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 3:12 AM, Hammond, Tony <t.hammond at nature.com> wrote:

> Hi Alan:
>
> Many thanks for that explanation. I kind of wondered.
>
> So, DC is promoted as a semantic lingua franca on the Web. And yet here it
> seems that Protege has effectively outlawed it and decided it cannot be
> applied to objects of discourse, but can only assume the inferior role of
> "annotating" ontologies. A laudable role certainly, but not centre stage.
>
> Shouldn't the ontology maker be the one to make that call?
>

I think that an ontology author needs to be able to be able to both make the
call that they want the term defined as annotation and that they want to use
the ontology as the ontology maker defined them. In the case of DC, there
are versions with and without domains and ranges, so the maker lets you make
two calls. In practice, many uses of DC are very simple, and are applied to
classes, individuals and properties alike. In OWL1 this wasn't allowed. In
OWL2 it is allowed, but has the consequence that object properties "applied
to" classes or properties (in the interface) land up being statements on
same-named individuals. Some reasoners don't perform well with individuals
and so this can be undesirable.

The mistake here, IMO, is that the OWLAPI built anything about this in, and
therefore removed the choice. Previously it was common to use
http://protege.stanford.edu/plugins/owl/dc/protege-dc.owl when it was the
case that you wanted to use the properties as annotation properties.

In OWL full the distinction between these property types goes away, so for
some uses it doesn't matter if different developers make different choices.

-Alan


>
> Cheers,
>
> Tony
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: protege-owl-bounces at lists.stanford.edu on behalf of Alan Ruttenberg
> Sent: Mon 11/29/2010 2:46 AM
> To: User support for the Protege-OWL editor
> Subject: Re: [protege-owl] Managing Annotation Properties in P4
>
> On Sun, Nov 28, 2010 at 10:39 AM, Hammond, Tony <t.hammond at nature.com
> >wrote:
>
> >  Hi:
> >
> > I am using P4.1.0 (build 213) on a Mac and am having problems
> understanding
> > how to manage annotation properties. Whenever I import an ontology or an
> RDF
> > document (RDF/XML or RDF/TTL) it seems that simple DC properties are
> > automatically translated to annotation properties. Is there any way to
> > override this behaviour so that I can treat DC properties as basic
> datatype
> > properties?
> >
> Regrettably this is built in to the OWLAPI that protege uses. I submitted a
> bug report and to my surprise the developer closed the bug with "wontfix",
> despite it being  not part of the OWL spec. Here's the ticket.
>
>
> http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=595534&aid=2975913&group_id=90989
>
> For this and some other reasons I landed up building my own build of
> protege/owlapi. Unfortunately it's a few months out of date by now, though
> it might be of some use - let me know and I'll send you a pointer. If you
> are up for doing your own build, I can send you the patches to the OWLAPI.
>
> I think the protege developers could undo this if they have the will.
>
> Best,
> Alan
>
>
>
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Tony
> >
> >
> ********************************************************************************
> > DISCLAIMER: This e-mail is confidential and should not be used by anyone
> who is
> > not the original intended recipient. If you have received this e-mail in
> error
> > please inform the sender and delete it from your mailbox or any other
> storage
> > mechanism. Neither Macmillan Publishers Limited nor any of its agents
> accept
> > liability for any statements made which are clearly the sender's own and
> not
> > expressly made on behalf of Macmillan Publishers Limited or one of its
> agents.
> > Please note that neither Macmillan Publishers Limited nor any of its
> agents
> > accept any responsibility for viruses that may be contained in this
> e-mail or
> > its attachments and it is your responsibility to scan the e-mail and
> > attachments (if any). No contracts may be concluded on behalf of
> Macmillan
> > Publishers Limited or its agents by means of e-mail communication.
> Macmillan
> > Publishers Limited Registered in England and Wales with registered number
> 785998
> > Registered Office Brunel Road, Houndmills, Basingstoke RG21 6XS
> >
> ********************************************************************************
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/20101129/4a6c8bed/attachment.html>


More information about the protege-owl mailing list