- From: Mark van Assem <mark@cs.vu.nl>
- Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 09:54:41 +0300
- To: "Elisa F. Kendall" <ekendall@sandsoft.com>
- CC: Mark van Assem <mark@few.vu.nl>, SWBPD list <public-swbp-wg@w3.org>, Jennifer Venedetti <vendetti@stanford.edu>
Hi Elisa, Jennifer, As Aldo mentions the problem is probably that the schemas state that each owl:Datatype/ObjectProperty is also an rdf:Property. Quirky maybe, but not prohibited :) I also heard that there are some problems with owl imports, but they are not used in the WordNet schemas. Thanks for mentioning this, Mark. Elisa F. Kendall wrote: > Hi Mark, > > We have had similar problems with OWL ontologies generated by our UML > tool validating/loading in most of > the tools you've listed, including Protege beta 3.1, but not in 3.2. We > have not tried them in Triple20, but we > do load them successfully in Pellet and RacerPro. > I've reported this to Jennifer at SMI, who indicated that the behavior > around OWL imports in Protege-OWL > has changed recently, with contributions from new collaborators from the > University of Manchester who > have provided the imports code. I've copied Jennifer in hopes that she > will forward the links and issue > to the appropriate developers. > > Thanks, > > Elisa > > Mark van Assem wrote: > >> >> >> Hi all, >> >> The schemas for WordNet Basic and Full are online [1]. They >> validate/load in the W3C RDF Validator [2], the WonderWeb OWL >> validator [3], Triple20 [4] and SWOOP [5]. They do not load in Protege >> Full 3.2 Beta [6], for a reason I do not understand. >> >> A few remaining questions/comments: >> >> - I used XML Schema Datatypes also for e.g. the gloss and lexicalForm >> properties, but I can recall that when properties have an XSD as range >> then the actual glosses and lexical forms are not supplied with the >> XML lang attribute. If this is correct, I should probably change to >> rdfs:Literal? >> >> - there are two properties that are subPropertyOf rdfs:label / >> rdfs:comment. The OWL validator complains that the rdfs properties >> should be DatatypeProperties. Is this an issue? >> >> - I have not cleaned the rdfs:comments in the schema files yet. >> >> Cheers, >> Mark. >> >> [1]http://www.w3.org/2006/03/wn/wn20/schemas/ >> [2]http://www.w3.org/RDF/Validator/ >> [3]http://phoebus.cs.man.ac.uk:9999/OWL/Validator >> [4]http://www.swi-prolog.org/packages/Triple20/ >> [5]http://www.mindswap.org/2004/SWOOP/ >> [6]http://protege.stanford.edu/download/registered.html >> >> >> Mark van Assem wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> Dear all, >>> >>> A new version of the WordNet draft can be found at [1] for >>> consideration for First Working Draft status at tomorrow's telecon. >>> >>> The main differences with the previous [2] draft are (a) new proposal >>> for URIs as discussed on the list; (b) all material on indirection >>> and versioning is moved to the Issues list. >>> >>> The RDF will be made available a.s.a.p. when the conversion program >>> has been adapted to the changes in the Draft and a service has been >>> set up at the W3C to serve CBD's for the WN URIs as described in the >>> Draft. >>> >>> With regards, >>> Mark. >>> >>> [1]http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/WNET/wn-conversion-20062304 >>> [2]http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/WNET/wn-conversion-20060403 >>> >>
Received on Thursday, 11 May 2006 06:54:47 UTC