W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-dev@w3.org > October to December 2007

RE: Representing anonymous individual in SemWeb Best Practice documents

From: Benedicto Rodriguez <br205r@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2007 17:12:28 +0100
Message-ID: <CD0CED2DB07AA249BF8BC259CADD260C76C7AE@dumbledore.ecs.soton.ac.uk>
To: "Owl Dev" <public-owl-dev@w3.org>
Cc: "Ian Horrocks" <horrocks@cs.man.ac.uk>, "Ibach, Brandon L" <brandon.l.ibach@lmco.com>

Brandon, Ian,

Thanks a lot for your responses.

I'm happy to report that your suggestions work and parse great both in
N3 and RDF/XML *syntax* :)

I'd like to point out that this is all part of a research task about (in
a nutshell) comparing different ontology modeling options to model
conceptual overlap in domain concepts. I am using the applicable
approaches and variations presented in the SWBPD WG docs as a starting

> From: Ian Horrocks [mailto:horrocks@cs.man.ac.uk]
> Sent: 17 October 2007 16:28
> I can
> warmly recommend the new 4.x version of Protege [1] (make sure you
> get 4.x -- it has been completely re-engineered to be OWL specific,
> and is orders of magnitude faster and slicker than the 3.x versions).

I have also installed the 4.x version (didn't try before because it is
an alpha version) and the first impression after opening some of the OWL
ontologies I am using it is definitely very positive.

> On 17 Oct 2007, at 02:29, Ibach, Brandon L wrote:
> >
> > Note, also, that it is somewhat imprecise to refer to the RDF/XML
> > as an
> > "OWL implementation" in contrast to the N3 version.  Both N3 and
> > are valid syntaxes for an OWL ontology, as they are both valid
> > syntaxes
> > for RDF, upon which OWL is built.

Note made :) I think that was my traditional C, C++, Java software
developer mindset drawing imprecise analogies :)

Thanks again,

Postgraduate Student | Intelligence, Agents and Multimedia Group |
School of Electronics and Computer Science | University of Southampton |
Southampton SO17 1BJ | United Kingdom | Phone: +44 23 8059 3122 | Email:
Received on Thursday, 18 October 2007 16:19:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:58:16 UTC