- From: Cox, Simon (L&W, Clayton) <Simon.Cox@csiro.au>
- Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2019 05:47:12 +0000
- To: Chris Mungall <cjmungall@lbl.gov>, Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
- CC: Simon Steyskal <simon.steyskal@gmail.com>, Martin G. Skjæveland <martige@ifi.uio.no>, Martynas Jusevičius <martynas@atomgraph.com>, "Semantic Web" <semantic-web@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <ME2PR01MB5362B34BBCEECAC9DF93A347887E0@ME2PR01MB5362.ausprd01.prod.outlook.com>
SPIN had the advantage that it supported SPARQL CONSTRUCT. This is still hinted at in SHCAL but I haven’t found it implemented. From: Chris Mungall <cjmungall@lbl.gov> Sent: Tuesday, 5 November, 2019 12:25 To: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org> Cc: Simon Steyskal <simon.steyskal@gmail.com>; Martin G. Skjæveland <martige@ifi.uio.no>; Martynas Jusevičius <martynas@atomgraph.com>; Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org> Subject: Re: [ANN] OTTR: RDF/OWL modelling framework release, ISWC tutorial AFAIK shape languages can't be used in a generative capacity. OTTR seems more in the family of templating languages such as OPPL[1], ROBOT templates[2], or Dead Simple OWL Design Paterns[3] [1] https://github.com/owlcs/OPPL2 [2] http://robot.obolibrary.org/template R.C. Jackson, J.P. Balhoff, E. Douglass, N.L. Harris, C.J. Mungall, and J.A. Overton. ROBOT: A tool for automating ontology workflows. BMC Bioinformatics, vol. 20, July 2019. https://link.springer.com/epdf/10.1186/s12859-019-3002-3 [3] Dead Simple OWL Design Patterns David Osumi-Sutherland, Melanie Courtot, James P. Balhoff and Christopher Mungall Journal of Biomedical Semantics 2017 8:18 DOI:10.1186/s13326-017-0126-0 https://jbiomedsem.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13326-017-0126-0 On Fri, Nov 1, 2019 at 1:45 AM Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org<mailto:danbri@danbri.org>> wrote: Or, for that matter, ShEx? https://shex.io/ A good comparison could help clarify the entire design space. (academics looking for good semweb topics for students, please take note!) On Fri, 1 Nov 2019 at 05:59, Simon Steyskal <simon.steyskal@gmail.com<mailto:simon.steyskal@gmail.com>> wrote: or SHACL? https://www.w3.org/TR/shacl/#sparql-constraint-components https://www.w3.org/TR/shacl-af/ - simon On Fri, 25 Oct 2019, 09:09 Martynas Jusevičius, <martynas@atomgraph.com<mailto:martynas@atomgraph.com>> wrote: Hi Martin, how does OTTR compare to SPIN templates? https://spinrdf.org/spin.html#spin-templates Martynas On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 5:02 AM Martin G. Skjæveland <martige@ifi.uio.no<mailto:martige@ifi.uio.no>> wrote: > > Hi all, > > Lutra, the open source reference implementation of OTTR templates, is > now available in release version 0.6. > > OTTR (Reasonable Ontology Templates) allows RDF/OWL modelling patterns > to be precisely defined and instantiated and support desirable modelling > principles such as > > - layered abstractions > - encapsulating complexity > - uniform modelling > - DRY don't repeat yourself > - separation of design and content > > Lutra and OTTR supports many convenient language constructs: > - nested template definitions > - typing system adapted to RDF and OWL > - optional arguments > - list arguments > and support bulk loading data from spreadsheets and databases. > > To see and learn what this means, visit the project page: > http://ottr.xyz and the primer http://spec.ottr.xyz/pOTTR/0.1/ > containing many interactive examples. > > If you are attending ISWC 2019, please come to our tutorial "Scalable > construction of sustainable knowledge bases" tomorrow, Saturday October > 26: http://ottr.xyz/event/2019-10-267-iswc/ > > On behalf of the OTTR team, > Martin >
Received on Tuesday, 5 November 2019 05:47:26 UTC