W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-comments@w3.org > February 2012

Re: Comment syntax for OWL functional syntax ?

From: Matthew Horridge <matthew.horridge@cs.man.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 08:10:34 -0800
Message-Id: <57F83863-2DFC-4C71-99EB-8E530BC68A1D@cs.man.ac.uk>
To: public-owl-comments@w3.org
I've just looked at the grammar for the OWL API functional syntax.  It already seems to supports line based comments starting with //.  At the moment comments like this are thrown away during parsing.

Cheers,

Matthew




On 17 Feb 2012, at 05:01, Bijan Parsia wrote:

> The simplest answer to all this is "Don't use Functional Syntax for exchange or storage". This is not an unreasonable answer, but it's probably not a satisfactory answer.
> 
> The simplest way to get this (functionally :)) changed is to submit a patch to the OWL API. Once the OWL API supports it, most things will need to follow suit :)
> 
> I would couple that with a small preprocessing script that strips out such comments.
> 
> Ideally, we'd update the OWL API to do a "best guess" job of salvaging comments from one format to another....
> 
> To address David's use case, it seems that it suffices to have rdfs:labels (and similar) and a pretty printer that munges the file in some way. If that version of the file is never passed on, then it doesn't matter if downstream parsers strip the #s
> 
> Axioms annotations can be bent to this purpose quite easily, as well, I'd warrant...
> 
> Cheers,
> Bijan.
Received on Friday, 17 February 2012 16:11:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 17 February 2012 16:11:13 GMT