W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-owl-wg@w3.org > March 2008

Re: Some comments on the Primer document

From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@cs.man.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 18:23:16 +0000
Message-Id: <F18AE55A-128B-4682-8090-3560DD268B6A@cs.man.ac.uk>
Cc: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>, public-owl-wg@w3.org
To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>

On 28 Mar 2008, at 18:03, Ivan Herman wrote:

> Bijan Parsia wrote:
>>> 2. I am on record saying that I would like to have Turtle added  
>>> to this document as an alternative (and much more readable)  
>>> syntax. I want to put my money where my mouth is, so I will try  
>>> to make a turtle version of the RDF/XML ontology in the appendix;  
>>> I hope to do that before the f2f. Is that o.k. with you?
>> Feel free, but I remind you that I'm aiming for automated  
>> translation, so your effort might be wasted work, in some sense.  
>> I'm also still thinking about the particular example and whether  
>> it's ideal.
>> (Indeed, autotranslating the whole ontology is easy, it's doing  
>> the individual fragments that's a bit of a pita..not hard, merely  
>> a touch tedious. If having the whole ontology translated would  
>> suffice for you I can run the owl api and do it.)
> My ideal would be to have the turtle be integral part of the  
> document, just like RDF/XML and the rest.

Oh, that's the goal, no doubt. It's just a bit tedious at the moment  
such that I'd rather spend my time working on other bits or on  
autotranslation. If you want to do it, I won't stop you at all. Just  
don't wack me if the day after you finish an autotranslation  
mechanism goes on line or I change the example entirely. As long as  
you are ok with that, go ahead.

My point about the end is that it's very easy to translate and  
incorporate a "whole ontology" so I don't worry about wasted work there.

If your concern is merely signaling, then you could translate the  
first few or we could put up a note. If you think it'll help feedback  
to have all the examples in turtle, then we should do that.

> Autotranslating is indeed doable, though probably one would have to  
> massage to output a bit to make it more readable. But, of course,  
> doing the individual fragment that is, well,...

I think it's fully doable.

> O.k. Then let me turn the question back to you:-): what can I do to  
> help this process?

Help with the autotranslator framework? Or, if you are ok with the  
translation maybe being thrown out, you can, of course, do it by  
hand. Obviously, more syntaxes sooner is better, but you should judge  
whether it's worth your effort.

Received on Friday, 28 March 2008 18:21:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:42:03 UTC