On Apr 19, 2014, at 10:38 PM, Andrea Westerinen <arwesterinen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: (01)
> Leo and Kingsley, Here are some replies (thanks for the dialog):
>
> * Kingsley wrote: "... there are a lot of raw URIs in the scope of the
>viewer. You alleviate this problem by adding more rdfs:label, skos:prefLabel
>etc.. relations i.e., I would have a label and comment (at the very least) for
>every entity described in these documents."
>
> There actually is a label, a description and much more for each entity. The
>difference is that the ontology uses its own namespace, and not the standard
>ones. (02)
Bad practice! One should always re-use existing (and widely deployed) IRIs
where possible. If you want your ontology to actually be used, that is. (03)
> And, I have avoided importing the Dublin Core and SKOS RDFs, because you
>then get all the concepts from those schemas. (04)
You can use the DC and SKOS IRIs without actually importing the RDFs, so you
only use the ones you need. Importation is a red herring here. (05)
> In a comment on the ontology, I discuss what I did not map from Dublin Core
>and SKOS, and why.
>
> I was trying to make a succinct ontology that listed the "recommended"
>properties that should be provided for a reusable ontology. (Which also means
>that I will be adding more details - like documenting the competency questions
>for the ontology. I just started with Dublin Core and SKOS.)
>
> Also, there are two sides to the coin of using the standard annotations. If
>you have a tool that reads/writes the standard properties, then all is good.
>However, if you are creating your own application, you have to remember when
>writing queries (or hand-editing ontologies, etc.) that rdfs is the prefix for
>label, skos is the prefix for prefLabel, etc. I was hoping to simplify this.
>I have some customers doing their own ontologies that get confused by all the
>namespaces. (06)
Actually those short labels are declared locally to your document, so you could
change them if you like. However, they do have to be *different*, which might
not solve your customers' problems. (07)
Pat Hayes (08)
>
> * Leo wrote: "If I am reading you right, Andrea, (and please correct me if
>I’m wrong) ... what you are intending to do is to enable OWL (ontology, rather
>than a SKOS lexical vocabulary) to provide you via annotation properties ways
>to align ontology constructs. Unfortunately in OWL, more complex statements of
>axioms do have to be put into annotations/documentation."
>
> This was not my intent with the annotation properties. I was not trying to
>do alignment, but simply to document the correspondence of the concepts. As I
>said in my previous email, annotation properties are "obviously totally
>inadequate to do anything significant, but [they are] a start as a
>documentation tool ... Separately, I am working on a more formal approach to
>mapping, but starting with documentation is where I am."
>
> Hope this helps explain things better, and thanks for the feedback.
>
> Andrea Westerinen
> T: 425.891.8407
> arwesterinen@xxxxxxxxx or andreaw@xxxxxxxxxxx
> http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?AndreaWesterinen
> organizingknowledge.blogspot.com
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 8:42 PM, Obrst, Leo J. <lobrst@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> If I am reading you right, Andrea, (and please correct me if I’m wrong) the
>problem behind the problem, i.e., what you are intending to do, is to enable
>OWL (ontology, rather than a SKOS lexical vocabulary) to provide you via
>annotation properties ways to align ontology constructs. Unfortunately in OWL,
>more complex statements of axioms do have to be put into
>annotations/documentation.
>
>
>
> It would be nice if one could make annotation properties symbolic, i.e., able
>to be reasoned over. At various times, there were suggestions to make this so.
>However, it is difficult to do this (witness the desire to have more complex
>axioms, as above, which exceed the expressiveness of OWL or description logics
>more generally), and so it’s fallen aside, as far as I know. There are
>approaches, in more formally expressive languages, such as labelled deduction,
>i.e., so-called hybrid logics, to do that, i.e., correlate additional
>assertions about provenance, security, belief, etc., i.e., getting into modal
>logic. I’m not sure whether Common Logic can express this, but probably IKL
>can. But OWL can’t.
>
>
>
> There have also been attempts to extend the mapping/alignment capabilities of
>OWL more finely, beyond equivalence statements and import, e.g.,
>epsilon-connections [1-3] (along the lines of a simple example I gave on the
>Ontology Summit list earlier this year), but I don’t know that those have been
>realized. Maybe others can weigh in.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Leo
>
>
>
> [1] Kutz, O.; C. Lutz, F. Wolter, M. Zakharyaschev. 2994. E-Connections of
>Abstract Description Systems, Artificial Intelligence 156 (2004) 1–73.
>
> [2] Kutz, O. 2004. E-Connections and logics of distance, Ph.D. thesis,
>University of Liverpool. http://www.csc.liv.ac.uk/~frank/publ/oliverdiss.pdf.
>
> [3] Grau, Bernardo Cuenca; Bijan Parsia; and Evren Sirin. 2006. Combining OWL
>ontologies using E-Connections. Web Semant. 4, 1 (January 2006), 40-59.
>DOI=10.1016/j.websem.2005.09.010
>http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.websem.2005.09.010.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>[mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Kingsley Idehen
> Sent: Friday, April 18, 2014 7:21 AM
> To: ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
> Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Reusable Metadata Ontology
>
>
>
> On 4/17/14 8:11 PM, Andrea Westerinen wrote:
>
> Leo, I see the confusion. Two things are happening here. As you said in a
>separate email to me ...
>
> The initial problem is that if you just download any of these ontologies in
>github (by right clicking on the file and selecting Save Link As), you get an
>html file with “github” references everywhere.
>
> If you instead select the file in github just by left clicking on it, and
>then select the Raw tab, you get the raw file in your browser window, which
>you can then save as an apparently true ttl/ofn/owl file. Then you can load it
>into Protégé.
>
> I am attaching the Turtle version (as a .txt file to get through people's
>email filters, I hope that it works) to try to avoid the agony of downloading
>from GitHub without forking.
>
> Let me note also that there are NO classes, data or object properties in this
>ontology. There are only annotation properties that can be used on classes,
>data and object properties. Since I need this all to be usable in reasoning
>applications, I started with defining and documenting annotation properties.
>I try to note this in a comment on the ontology (but I should probably expand
>the comment). I am also working on a metadata-properties ontology which
>defines some of the annotation properties as data and object properties. This
>will allow (for example) validating dateTime values and referencing
>objects/individuals in relations (as opposed to using literal values).
>
> So, for example, I define an exactMatch annotation property that is used to
>describe how a class or property semantically aligns with another class,
>property, vocabulary, etc. Again, this has to be done using an annotation
>property or I fall into OWL Full. This is obviously totally inadequate to do
>anything significant, but it is a start as a documentation tool. (There is
>also a property called closeMatch - as in SKOS - but what really does that
>mean? How close is "close"? <image001.gif>) Separately, I am working on a
>more formal approach to mapping but starting with documentation is where I am.
>
>
>
> Hope this helps to clarify things,
>
>
>
> Andrea Westerinen
>
> T: 425.891.8407
>
> arwesterinen@xxxxxxxxx or andreaw@xxxxxxxxxxx
>
> http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?AndreaWesterinen
>
> organizingknowledge.blogspot.com
>
> Andrea,
>
> If you put a Turtle (or any other notation) based RDF document on Github,
>that's ample for any HTTP user agent to access and consume. The "Raw" page
><https://raw.githubusercontent.com/NinePts/reusable-ontologies/master/metadata/metadata-annotations.ttl>
> is what exposes your content for direct consumption via an HTTP URL .
>
> I consume the document content directly (we call this sponging) via the
>publicly available Linked Open Data transformation service that we provide
>[1][2][3][4].
>
> Comment:
>
> As you can see from the UI, there are a lot of raw URIs in the scope of the
>viewer. You alleviate this problem by adding more rdfs:label, skos:prefLabel
>etc.. relations i.e., I would have a label and comment (at the very least) for
>every entity described in these documents. That's what I do in my glossary of
>terms doc [5][6].
>
> Links:
>
> [1]
>http://linkeddata.uriburner.com/about/html/https/raw.githubusercontent.com/NinePts/reusable-ontologies/master/metadata/metadata-annotations.ttl
> -- result of basic sponging
>
> [2]
>http://linkeddata.uriburner.com/describe/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fraw.githubusercontent.com%2FNinePts%2Freusable-ontologies%2Fmaster%2Fmetadata%2Fmetadata-annotations.ttl
> -- alternative view using a UI with deeper faceted navigation over relations
>(classes and instances are in the mix via this UI)
>
> [3] http://linkeddata.uriburner.com -- Linked Open Data extract, import, and
>transform (ETL) service
>
> [4] http://ode.openlinksw.com -- Browser extensions that reduce Linked Open
>Data ETL and exploitation to a single click or CTRL+Mouse context menu lookup
>action
>
> [5] http://bit.ly/19NRwnB -- Glossary of Terms doc
>
> [6]
>https://github.com/kidehen/GlossaryOfTerms/blob/master/GlossaryOfTerms.ttl --
>Github version .
>
>
>
> --
>
> Regards,
>
> Kingsley Idehen
> Founder & CEO
> OpenLink Software
> Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
> Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
> Twitter Profile: https://twitter.com/kidehen
> Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/+KingsleyIdehen/about
> LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
> Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
> To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
> Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
> To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J (09)
------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC (850)434 8903 home
40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office
Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax
FL 32502 (850)291 0667 mobile (preferred)
phayes@xxxxxxx http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes (010)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J (011)
|