Re: Annotations and ontology design principles WAS : Working list of BP requirements identified during the SDW WG f2f

Hi Kerry,


On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 8:24 PM, <Kerry.Taylor@csiro.au> wrote:
>
> c) did nothing for non-anglophiles – but note that this has been requested
> since.
>
>
>
> I would hesitate to use terms stolen from other owl ontologies – as it is
> important that such properties are only “annotation properties” in owl, and
> declaring, say “prov:wasDerivedFrom” as an annotation property in our
> context will certainly create problems when our work is combined with prov.
> Formally, I suspect it is ok (as I suspect  the same property name can be
> used as both an annotation property and an object property but it means two
> different things), but it will most certainly create confusion for users
> anyway.
>


If we use OWL 2 DL, there is a strict separation between annotation
properties, object properties, and data properties, i.e., an annotation
property cannot be at the same time an object property or a data property.
See OWL 2 Structural Specification section 5.8.1. (
http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-syntax/#Typing_Constraints_of_OWL_2_DL)

What is allowed is using a URI as both a named individual and a class name
(the Punning feature)
http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-new-features/#F12:_Punning

p.s. I don't have a write access to the wiki, so maybe you could add these
to the wiki if you wish.

best regards,
Adila


>
>
> I had been thinking of making a place on the wiki for "ontology design
> principles" since we have a few to do. I had thought to do this when we
> were up to it, but perhaps we should start now.
>
>
>
> Here it is – please use it!
>
>
>
> https://www.w3.org/2015/spatial/wiki/Ontology_Design_Principles
>
>
>
>
>
> Kerry
>
> > -----Original Message-----
>
> > From: Raphaël Troncy [mailto:raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr]
>
> > Sent: Friday, 20 March 2015 9:01 AM
>
> > To: Cox, Simon (L&W, Highett); frans.knibbe@geodan.nl; public-sdw-
>
> > wg@w3.org
>
> > Subject: Re: Working list of BP requirements identified during the SDW
>
> > WG f2f
>
> >
>
> > Dear Simon,
>
> >
>
> > To follow up, as Kerry mentioned, most of the classes and properties
>
> > have already a English label, you can actually see the result using a
>
> > different viewer that our automatically generated HTML page, e.g. at
>
> > http://vowl.visualdataweb.org/webvowl/#iri=http://data.ign.fr/def/ignf
>
> > where on the top right, you can select your favorite language.
>
> >
>
> > What we intended to do is also to translate the comments, now only in
>
> > French, and of course more languages are welcome.
>
> >
>
> > > BTW - I notice that you use rdfs:isDefinedBy to link from members to
>
> > > the ontology as a whole.
>
> >
>
> > Indeed, we do. The tools we use tend to do something with this.
>
> >
>
> > > In the case we are discussing - which concerns traceability of
>
> > > individual resources to their original definitions in a different
>
> > > formalization - perhaps dct:isVersionOf, or prov:alternateOf or
>
> > > prov:wasDerivedFrom provide more specific semantics.
>
> >
>
> > As you have said, the biggest problem is that the ISO standard does not
>
> > give us URI to re-use and link to. Perhaps we could simply reference
>
> > the appropriate section in the ISO document in each rdfs:comment?
>
> >
>
> >    Raphaël
>
> >
>
> > --
>
> > Raphaël Troncy
>
> > EURECOM, Campus SophiaTech
>
> > Multimedia Communications Department
>
> > 450 route des Chappes, 06410 Biot, France.
>
> > e-mail: raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr & raphael.troncy@gmail.com
>
> > Tel: +33 (0)4 - 9300 8242
>
> > Fax: +33 (0)4 - 9000 8200
>
> > Web: http://www.eurecom.fr/~troncy/
>
>
>