Entity URI

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
7 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Entity URI

Madani,Sina

What is the recommended practice for creating entity URI; auto(semantic/meaning less) ID or user/human readable supplied name?

As I create new classes (with human readable names), I find myself in situations where a change in class name (of the previously created classes) becomes necessary. I understand that I can fix this issue by assigning IDs to class names and rendering my ontology with rdfs:label but am concerned this approach could have performance/maintenance issue at the query time with SPARQL.

Would appreciate your input on pros & cons of each approach.

 

Thanks

Sina


_______________________________________________
protege-owl mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-owl

Instructions for unsubscribing: http://protege.stanford.edu/doc/faq.html#01a.03
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Entity URI

Alan Ruttenberg-2
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 10:44 AM, Madani,Sina <[hidden email]> wrote:
> What is the recommended practice for creating entity URI;
> auto(semantic/meaning less) ID or user/human readable supplied name?
>
> As I create new classes (with human readable names), I find myself in
> situations where a change in class name (of the previously created classes)
> becomes necessary. I understand that I can fix this issue by assigning IDs
> to class names and rendering my ontology with rdfs:label but am concerned
> this approach could have performance/maintenance issue at the query time
> with SPARQL.

There are a couple of recent threads on the HCLS list that might be of interest:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-semweb-lifesci/2011Jun/0080.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-semweb-lifesci/2011Jun/0125.html

I have participated in these conversations.
My view is that IDs are preferable, and that performance issues need
not arise by use of a suitable tool that transforms SPARQL queries
written in terms of labels into ones written in terms of the URIs.

You can also have a look at http://obofoundry.org/id-policy.shtml

Regards,
Alan

>
> Would appreciate your input on pros & cons of each approach.
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Sina
>
> _______________________________________________
> protege-owl mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-owl
>
> Instructions for unsubscribing:
> http://protege.stanford.edu/doc/faq.html#01a.03
>
>
_______________________________________________
protege-owl mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-owl

Instructions for unsubscribing: http://protege.stanford.edu/doc/faq.html#01a.03
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Entity URI

fariz darari
In reply to this post by Madani,Sina
you could separate the semantics of your entity with its uri.. Here's
a simple example of uri assigning to entities
http://openorg.ecs.soton.ac.uk/wiki/OrganisationalStructure

On 6/23/11, Madani,Sina <[hidden email]> wrote:

> What is the recommended practice for creating entity URI;
> auto(semantic/meaning less) ID or user/human readable supplied name?
> As I create new classes (with human readable names), I find myself in
> situations where a change in class name (of the previously created classes)
> becomes necessary. I understand that I can fix this issue by assigning IDs
> to class names and rendering my ontology with rdfs:label but am concerned
> this approach could have performance/maintenance issue at the query time
> with SPARQL.
> Would appreciate your input on pros & cons of each approach.
>
> Thanks
> Sina
>


--
Regards,
Fariz Darari
Universitas Indonesia
_______________________________________________
protege-owl mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-owl

Instructions for unsubscribing: http://protege.stanford.edu/doc/faq.html#01a.03
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Entity URI

fariz darari
also, this http://www.w3.org/TR/cooluris/ contains some examples of
the best practices for assigning URIs

On 6/23/11, Fariz Darari <[hidden email]> wrote:

> you could separate the semantics of your entity with its uri.. Here's
> a simple example of uri assigning to entities
> http://openorg.ecs.soton.ac.uk/wiki/OrganisationalStructure
>
> On 6/23/11, Madani,Sina <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> What is the recommended practice for creating entity URI;
>> auto(semantic/meaning less) ID or user/human readable supplied name?
>> As I create new classes (with human readable names), I find myself in
>> situations where a change in class name (of the previously created
>> classes)
>> becomes necessary. I understand that I can fix this issue by assigning
>> IDs
>> to class names and rendering my ontology with rdfs:label but am concerned
>> this approach could have performance/maintenance issue at the query time
>> with SPARQL.
>> Would appreciate your input on pros & cons of each approach.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Sina
>>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Fariz Darari
> Universitas Indonesia
>


--
Regards,
Fariz Darari
Universitas Indonesia
_______________________________________________
protege-owl mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-owl

Instructions for unsubscribing: http://protege.stanford.edu/doc/faq.html#01a.03
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Ontology server

Girish Joglekar
I do not know if this is the right list to pose my question to, but I
will start here. If not, please direct me to the right list. Here is
what I want to do:
I have a few ontologies, each with several instances. I want to use the
instance data in applications. Given my current state of limited
owl/Protege knowledge, I would have to load all the ontologies in my
application, and then devise a way to find the right instance of a
specific class. This will prove to be very inefficient as the number of
instances grows, and seems unnecessary as at any given time I would be
interested in a very tiny fraction of the instances. There must be way
to set each ontology as a 'server' which would be running all the time
and then pose queries to the server(s) as required through a given
application. I do not know if it is possible, how to educate myself so
that I can develop something based on it, and what tools would be needed
to accomplish it.
Hope you are able to guide me in the right direction.
Girish Joglekar
_______________________________________________
protege-owl mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-owl

Instructions for unsubscribing: http://protege.stanford.edu/doc/faq.html#01a.03
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

HELP!!!

Girish Joglekar
In reply to this post by fariz darari
When I double click on a .pprj file, I get the following warning:



What do I do? Can I ignore it and proceed as if everything is fine, or there is a fix for it.
Thanks.
Girish

_______________________________________________
protege-owl mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-owl

Instructions for unsubscribing: http://protege.stanford.edu/doc/faq.html#01a.03
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: HELP!!!

Timothy Redmond
On 07/06/2011 08:50 AM, Girish Joglekar wrote:
When I double click on a .pprj file, I get the following warning:



What do I do? Can I ignore it and proceed as if everything is fine, or there is a fix for it.

I think that proceeding as though everything is fine will work.  A plugin broke when the bioportal was upgraded and I believe that there will be a Protege 3 release soon to fix this.

-Timothy


Thanks.
Girish
_______________________________________________ protege-owl mailing list [hidden email] https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-owl Instructions for unsubscribing: http://protege.stanford.edu/doc/faq.html#01a.03


_______________________________________________
protege-owl mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-owl

Instructions for unsubscribing: http://protege.stanford.edu/doc/faq.html#01a.03