Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 09:24:09 -0500
Cc: Brian Manley <brian.manley@gmail.com>, public-lod@w3.org, public-semweb-ui@w3.org
Message-Id: <24423804-67D6-4F7B-8A79-4240293CBD02@ihmc.us>
To: Bernhard Schandl <bernhard.schandl@univie.ac.at>
FWIW, we spent some time designing intuitive visualizations of OWL a few years ago for our COE graphic tool. One conclusion was that it is very confusing when OWL properties are sometimes seen as links and sometimes seen as nodes, and that it is much better to keep the graphic 'types' aligned consistently. So we represent domain and range by a special arc graphic (bold dashed lines) running from the domain, through the property arc, to the range. This way, the properties stay as arc labels and the classes as node labels. The result is intuitive (because people easily think of an OWL property as having a direction) so very easy to learn; and once learned, very easy to see, even in quite complex ontologies. Here's an example from the Wine ontology: On Jun 25, 2009, at 5:23 AM, Bernhard Schandl wrote: > Brian, > >> I think you're "better" graphic has an extra rdf:domain where an >> rdf:range should be. > > many thanks, fixed that. This shows again how careful one has to be > when it comes to visualization ;-) > > Best, Bernhard > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax FL 32502 (850)291 0667 mobile phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
(image/jpeg attachment: domainrangeeg.jpg)