Re: [protege-user] OWL Reasoner for WebProtege
Michael DeBellis <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.misc.ontology.protege.owl |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CALGFikcfQT+E1JXzxNDEj21JjMja3+MjeAqukF1jGpm-1pXQiw@mail.gmail.com> |
Piotr, I can't answer your question, and you probably know this but just in case you don't and you can't find a way, there are some work arounds. You can export your ontology from Web Protege, load it into the desktop version, run the reasoner and then make changes if you find any issues using the reasoner. The nice thing is you can then upload the changed file back to Web Protege, and the version history is kept consistent. In the history on Web Protege it looks as if you made all the changes that were actually done on the Desktop version in Web Protege. Another work around is you can use "Save Inferred Axioms as Ontology" in Desktop Protege and then upload that to Web Protege. I don't think that saves every possible reasoner inference but it saves most of them. I don't use Web Protege much now but when I did and I used that option I never found any inferences that I needed but weren't saved. If you try this approach, just pay careful attention to the settings in Web Protege and Desktop Protege for new entities. This may no longer be the case but it used to be that when you upload a new ontology to Web Protege it didn't pick up the settings for new IRIs from Desktop Protege. The first time I tried going back and forth between Web and Desktop Protege I ended up with one set of IRIs for entities created in the Desktop version and another for those created in Web Protege. This is easy to fix, in fact I recommend anyone who uses Web Protege does this anyway, but make sure you manually set the parameters in Web Protege for new entity IRIs rather than just accept the defaults. Michael On Thu, Apr 10, 2025 at 2:48 AM Piotr Nowara <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > I would like to use WebProtege with an OWL reasoner (ideally ELK) - is > there any support for integrating an OWL reasoner? If not, do you have any > suggestions on how I could implement it? > > Best, > Piotr > _______________________________________________ > protege-user mailing list > [email protected] > https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-user > _______________________________________________ protege-user mailing list [email protected] https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-user