W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > April 2011

Re: Best Practice for Renaming OWL Vocabulary Elements

From: Bob Ferris <zazi@elbklang.net>
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 14:43:34 +0200
Message-ID: <4DB02676.40908@elbklang.net>
To: semantic-web@w3.org
CC: public-lod@w3.org
Hi Martin,

I think this issue is also related to ontology versioning and assigning 
an applied version of an ontology in a dataset (see, e.g., [1]).
OWL provides some properties to describe an version of an ontology, 
e.g., owl:priorVersion, owl:versionIRI, owl:backwardCompatibleWith (see 
[2,3]). However, all these relations have a range and domain of 
owl:Ontology. I'm unsure, whether you also like to type every property 
or class as an ontology (I think from a philosophical point of view this 
doesn't matter).
So far your class and property alignment to prior versions looks good. 
Albeit, I would separate these axioms from the core ontology, because 
they are only need if one likes to process reasoning with backward 
compatible term definitions.
Furthermore, you can make use of the SemWeb Vocab Status ontology [4] to 
mark an term, e.g., as 'archaic'.

Cheers,


Bob


[1] 
http://answers.semanticweb.com/questions/2815/how-do-i-knowmodel-the-applied-version-of-an-ontology-specification
[2] 
http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/REC-owl2-syntax-20091027/#Ontology_IRI_and_Version_IRI
[3] http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/REC-owl2-syntax-20091027/#Ontology_Annotations
[4] http://www.w3.org/2003/06/sw-vocab-status/ns#

On 4/21/2011 11:46 AM, Martin Hepp wrote:
> Dear all:
>
> I am considering to rename a few conceptual elements in the GoodRelations ontology. However, they are already in use in data, queries, and applications. Thus, I am thinking of the least intrusive way of implementing this. I think this question is also relevant for many other OWL vocabularies on the Web.
>
> Attached, please find my proposal. It critically depends on the ability of typical triple-stores to compute basic(*) inferences for
>
> - owl:equivalentProperty for owl:DatatypeProperty and owl:ObjectProperty entities,
> - owl:equivalentClass for pairs of owl:Class and
> - owl:sameAs for pairs of "ontological" instances, e.g. value nodes defined in the vocabulary.
>
> With "basic", I mean that additional triples for the additional class membership or property or instance must be materialized; this could be a subset of the complete theoretical implications.
> As far as I know, Virtuoso does support this to a sufficient degree, but I am unsure about other parts of widely deployed infrastructure.
>
> It would be no problem to express the necessary inferences by means of a SPARQL CONSTRUCT rule or in SPIN.
>
> Please share any suggestions and concerns with me.
>
> Old, but in use:
> ---------------
> foo:LongClassName a owl:Class ;
> 	rdfs:label "LongClassName" .
>
> foo:LongPropertyName1 a owl:DatatypeProperty ;
> 	rdfs:domain foo:LongClassName ;
> 	rdfs:label "LongPropertyName1" .
>
> foo:LongPropertyName2 a owl:ObjectProperty ;
> 	rdfs:domain foo:LongClassName ;
> 	rdfs:range foo:SomeOtherClass1 ;	
> 	rdfs:label "LongPropertyName1" .
>
> foo:LongNameIndividual a foo:SomeOtherClass2 ;
> 	rdfs:label "LongNameIndividual" .
>
> Now, we want to rename those elements as follows, without breaking old data nor old queries / applications:
>
> foo:LongClassName -->  foo:NewClassName
> foo:LongPropertyName1 -->  foo:NewPropertyName1
> foo:LongPropertyName2 -->  foo:NewPropertyName2
> foo:LongNameIndividual -->  foo:NewNameIndividual
>
> Proposal:
> --------
> a) Step 1: Define new classes, properties, individuals and link back to their old variants
>
> foo:NewClassName a owl:Class ;
> 	owl:equivalentClass foo:LongClassName .
> 	rdfs:label "NewClassName (Note: This was foo:LongClassName previously)" .
>
> foo:NewPropertyName1 a owl:DatatypeProperty ;
> 	owl:equivalentProperty foo:LongPropertyName1 ;
> 	rdfs:domain foo:NewClassName ;
> 	rdfs:label "NewPropertyName1 (Note: This was foo:LongPropertyName1 previously)" .
>
> foo:NewPropertyName2 a owl:ObjectProperty ;
> 	owl:equivalentProperty foo:LongPropertyName2 ;
> 	rdfs:domain foo:NewClassName ;
> 	rdfs:range foo:SomeOtherClass1 ;	
> 	rdfs:label "NewPropertyName2 (Note: This was foo:LongPropertyName2 previously)" .
>
> foo:NewNameIndividual a foo:SomeOtherClass2 ;
> 	owl:sameAs foo:LongNameIndividual ;
> 	rdfs:label "NewNameIndividual (Note: This was foo:LongNameIndividual previously)" .
>
> b) Step 2: Deprecate the old elements in OWL 2 style (using owl:deprecated)
> foo:LongClassName a owl:Class;
> 	owl:deprecated true;
> 	rdfs:label "LongClassName - Deprecated, use foo:NewClassName instead" .
>
> foo:LongPropertyName1 a owl:DatatypeProperty ;
> 	owl:deprecated true;
> 	rdfs:domain foo:LongClassName ;
> 	rdfs:label "LongPropertyName1 - Deprecated, use foo:NewPropertyName1 instead" .
>
> foo:LongPropertyName2 a owl:ObjectProperty ;
> 	owl:deprecated true ;
> 	rdfs:domain foo:LongClassName ;
> 	rdfs:range foo:SomeOtherClass1 ;	
> 	rdfs:label "LongPropertyName1 - Deprecated, use foo:NewPropertyName2 instead" .
>
> foo:LongNameIndividual a foo:SomeOtherClass2 ;
> 	owl:deprecated true ;
> 	rdfs:label "LongNameIndividual - Deprecated, use foo:NewNameIndividual instead" .
>
> c) Since the owl:deprecated property is not defined in OWL1, I would also add the following axiom in order to remain within OWL 1 DL:
> #OWL 1 DL compatibility of the OWL2 deprecated property
> owl:deprecated a owl:AnnotationProperty.
>
> Thanks in advance!
>
> Best
>
> Martin
Received on Thursday, 21 April 2011 12:44:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 21:45:42 GMT