W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > March 2009

Re: Whether description logic have a text edit tool?

From: Richard H. McCullough <rhm@pioneerca.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 07:18:56 -0700
Message-ID: <CFBD4C49F39D431ABF2FCF7B12CCD759@rhm8200>
To: "liuruiguang" <liu6272002@163.com>, <semantic-web@w3.org>
You might have a look at the mKR language
(http://mkrmke.org) to see if it appeals to you.
To date, all my translations have been
from OWL to mKR, but I would consider
implementing the reverse translation
if you are interested.

Note that some features of mKR,
e.g., methods, n-ary relations,
have no corresponding feature in OWL.

Dick McCullough
Ayn Rand do speak od mKR done;
mKE do enhance od Real Intelligence done;
knowledge := man do identify od existent done;
knowledge haspart proposition list;

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "liuruiguang" <liu6272002@163.com>
To: <semantic-web@w3.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 2009 2:22 AM
Subject: Re: Whether description logic have a text edit tool?

> Jie Bao-6 wrote:
>> How about trying Manchester syntax?
>> http://www.w3.org/2007/OWL/wiki/ManchesterSyntax
>> http://www.webont.org/owled/2006/acceptedLong/submission_9.pdf
>> On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 11:04 AM, liuruiguang <liu6272002@163.com> wrote:
>>> Whether there is a text editor to write the relations of concept and
>>> roles of
>>> description logic directly, and
>>> then automatically through any tools translated into owl ontology.Is
>>> there
>>> such a tool available?
>>> I think to use the tools such as protege etc. to operate very fussy. I
>>> enjoy
>>> writting description logic
>>> relationships as the same procedure as programming. I find a lot of 
>>> tools
>>> from internet, but all have no such
>>> feature. So I doubt that there isn't such tool? Can someone answer me?
>>> --
>>> View this message in context:
>>> http://www.nabble.com/Whether-description-logic-have-a-text-edit-tool--tp22540158p22540158.html
>>> Sent from the w3.org - semantic-web mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>> -- 
>> Jie Bao
>> http://www.cs.rpi.edu/~baojie
>    Thanks for your reply. I have tried Manchester syntax in visual tool
> protege, However, I found that it is not very usefull and convenient. I
> think the plus is based on protege, but haven't improved much, because the
> essence of both two is same.
>    As you know,there are some subsumption relations in the style of ,for
> example:
> v1 subclassof R only v2t    not_v1 subclassof R only not_v2t
> v2 subclassof R only v3t    not_v2 subclassof R only not_v3t
> (v1 and v2) subclassof R only (v2t and v3t)     (not_v1 or not_v2)
> subclassof R only (not_v2t and not_v3t)
> R some v2t subclassof v3
> v1 is equivalent of not not_v1, v2 is equivalent of not not_v2, likewise
> v2t-not_v2t,v3t-not_v3t
>    In the tool protege, the left of key word subclassof only permits
> primitive concept, so complex concept must use another equivalent concept 
> to
> replace it. Moreover the form of R some v2t subclassof v3 is not permited 
> in
> protege. For now, I have a task about description logic and need such 
> form.
> I have't found this in protege, and I think this is not convenience.
>    My be there are some features that I haven't knew. In my opinion ,I
> think if there is a text editor and supports writing description logic in
> more nature form as mentions above and input this text file to reasoner
> FaCT++,pellet etc. I think it will be very benefit for developer.
>    Thanks for your help, my English is not very well, and I hope I express
> my mean exactly. I expect your further reply, thank you again!
> -- 
> View this message in context: 
> http://www.nabble.com/Whether-description-logic-have-a-text-edit-tool--tp22540158p22575268.html
> Sent from the w3.org - semantic-web mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Received on Wednesday, 18 March 2009 14:21:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 07:42:10 UTC