Re: [protege-user] Question about OWL RDF-Based Semantics
Samson Tu <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.misc.ontology.protege.owl |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
It’s probably better to ask this question on the OWLAPI mailing list, as Protégé uses OWLAPI to parse and write serializations.
Of the two differences in your example, “a” is a shorthand for rdf:type:
("rdf:type
a property used to state that a resource is an instance of a class. A commonly accepted QName<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QName> for this property is "a".[9]<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RDF_Schema#cite_note-ducharme2011-9>
)
Quoted from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RDF_Schema
About the conversion of rdfs:Class to owl:Class, see the OWLAPI issue #456<https://github.com/owlcs/owlapi/issues/456>. The discussion doesn’t seem to be about any deep semantic issue.
With best regards,
Samson
On Jan 19, 2025, at 11:20 AM, Steve Vestal <[email protected]> wrote:
For example, the input file contained the statement
oslc:Error a rdfs:Class ;
but the saved file had the statement
oslc:Error rdf:type owl:Class ;
On 1/19/2025 11:59 AM, Samson Tu wrote:
Can you explain what you meant by the modifications Protégé (OWLAPI) makes to the initial input?
Samson
On Jan 19, 2025, at 5:46 AM, Steve Vestal via protege-user <[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]> wrote:
Someone recently pointed me to the "OWL 2 Web Ontology Language RDF-Based Semantics (Second Edition)" standard. I was aware that Protege (OWLAPI) does some modifications to the initial input in some cases. Are those modifications based on the RDF to DL transformations described in that standard? Is this related to OWL Full?
_______________________________________________
protege-user mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-user
_______________________________________________
protege-user mailing list
[email protected]
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-user