Re: protege-discussion Digest, Vol 64, Issue 14

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

Re: protege-discussion Digest, Vol 64, Issue 14

Girish Joglekar
Hi Matthew,

Thank you very much for the pointers. I will certainly study the papers.
A quick glance revealed that they are all 2011 publications. I am
surprised to find that with so much work going on in semantic web where
ontologies serve at the key building blocks, there is not much available
to address the migration issue. Have people done it mostly the hard way
in the past, or have they done it right the first time?

Does this mean that the plug-ins are available only for 4.0? Should I
migrate to 4.0? How will the move impact the current code I have? How
different is the Manchester API from Protege's OWL-API?

Thanks again for your help.

Girish

> Message: 4
> Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 16:10:33 -0800
> From: Matthew Horridge<[hidden email]>
> To: User support for Core Protege and the Protege-Frames editor
> <[hidden email]>
> Subject: Re: [protege-discussion] maintaining ontologies
> Message-ID:<[hidden email]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
> Hi Girish,
>
> This is quite a big topic.  There is quite a lot of research on ontology versioning and evolution and a fair number of tools that support tasks related to these topics.  Here are some things related to Protege 4....
>
> Some recent work, that is very nice, is work by Rafael Gon?alves at the university of Manchester - he looks at analysing changes between different versions of ontologies.  Here's a pointer to various publications on this:
>
> http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~goncalvj/publications.html
>
> Timothy Redmond and Natasha Noy have also done some recent work in this area and have produced a Protege 4 plugin.  Here's their paper
>
> http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-784/evodyn6.pdf
>
> and here's their plugin
>
> http://smi-protege.stanford.edu/repos/protege/protege4/plugins/org.protege.editor.owl.diff/trunk/
>
> There's also the OWLDiff plugin:
>
> http://protegewiki.stanford.edu/wiki/OWLDiff
>
>
> In terms of versioning with SVN, there were some recent posts on the Protege mailing lists about this.  A search through the archives should reveal some interesting posts.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Matthew
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 10 Nov 2011, at 05:32, Girish Joglekar wrote:
>
>    
>> If I change an ontology (add/delete/rearrange properties etc.) how do I systematically migrate old ontologies to the new definitions. I realize that if I add a class or a property, I do not have to do anything. But otherwise, I will have to do something programmatically. Is there a users manual which explains maintenance of ontologies in general? Also, how does svn fit into these schemes? I prefer to use Eclipse/Windows development platform. Thanks much.
>> Girish Joglekar
>> _______________________________________________
>> protege-discussion mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-discussion
>>
>> Instructions for unsubscribing: http://protege.stanford.edu/doc/faq.html#01a.03
>>      
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2011 13:20:38 +0100
> From: Daniel Domazer<[hidden email]>
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: [protege-discussion] Constraint - compare instances
> Message-ID:
> <CAKEHcg4rfSV0c7WYaw=[hidden email]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Hello,
>
> I have a problem concerning constraints again. I have the class
> :MULTI-LING-TEXT, which has slots of string for each language,
> and an abstract base class from which others derive. This base
> class has a slot named Description of :MULTI-LING-TEXT instances.
>
> What I want to check with the constraint is that for every instance
> of :MULTI-LING-TEXT should exist an instance of a subclass of
> AbstractBaseClass which uses this :MULTI-LING-TEXT instance.
>
>
>
> This is what I got so far:
>
> (defrange ?multitext :FRAME :MULTI-LING-TEXT)
> (defrange ?base :FRAME AbstractBaseClass)
>
> (forall ?multitext
>    (exists ?base
>      (= (Description ?base) ?multitext)))
>
> This iterates over all subclasses of AbstractBaseClass, right?
> Do I understand it right that (Description ?base) returns the
> instance and that this is compared to ?multitext if they are the
> same instance (not the content)? The documentation is not really
> clear to me.
>
> Thanks in advance!
>
> Best regards,
> Daniel Domazer
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:<http://mailman.stanford.edu/pipermail/protege-discussion/attachments/20111111/08370cee/attachment.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> protege-discussion mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-discussion
>
>
> End of protege-discussion Digest, Vol 64, Issue 14
> **************************************************
>    

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

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

Re: protege-discussion Digest, Vol 64, Issue 14

Girish Joglekar
Hi Matthew,

Thank you very much for the pointers. I will certainly study the papers.
A quick glance revealed that they are all 2011 publications. I am
surprised to find that with so much work going on in semantic web where
ontologies serve at the key building blocks, there is not much available
to address the migration issue. Have people done it mostly the hard way
in the past, or have they done it right the first time?

Does this mean that the plug-ins are available only for 4.0? Should I
migrate to 4.0? How will the move impact the current code I have? How
different is the Manchester API from Protege's OWL-API?

Thanks again for your help.

Girish



Message: 4
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 16:10:33 -0800
From: Matthew Horridge<[hidden email]>
To: User support for Core Protege and the Protege-Frames editor
<[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [protege-discussion] maintaining ontologies
Message-ID:<[hidden email]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1

Hi Girish,

This is quite a big topic.  There is quite a lot of research on ontology
versioning and evolution and a fair number of tools that support tasks
related to these topics.  Here are some things related to Protege 4....

Some recent work, that is very nice, is work by Rafael Gon?alves at the
university of Manchester - he looks at analysing changes between
different versions of ontologies.  Here's a pointer to various
publications on this:

http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~goncalvj/publications.html

Timothy Redmond and Natasha Noy have also done some recent work in this
area and have produced a Protege 4 plugin.  Here's their paper

http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-784/evodyn6.pdf

and here's their plugin

http://smi-protege.stanford.edu/repos/protege/protege4/plugins/org.protege.editor.owl.diff/trunk/ 


There's also the OWLDiff plugin:

http://protegewiki.stanford.edu/wiki/OWLDiff


In terms of versioning with SVN, there were some recent posts on the
Protege mailing lists about this.  A search through the archives should
reveal some interesting posts.

Cheers,

Matthew


On 10 Nov 2011, at 05:32, Girish Joglekar wrote:

> If I change an ontology (add/delete/rearrange properties etc.) how do
> I systematically migrate old ontologies to the new definitions. I
> realize that if I add a class or a property, I do not have to do
> anything. But otherwise, I will have to do something programmatically.
> Is there a users manual which explains maintenance of ontologies in
> general? Also, how does svn fit into these schemes? I prefer to use
> Eclipse/Windows development platform. Thanks much.
> Girish Joglekar
> _______________________________________________

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

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

Re: protege-discussion Digest, Vol 64, Issue 14

Girish Joglekar
In reply to this post by Girish Joglekar
Hi Matthew,

Thank you very much for the pointers. I will certainly study the papers.
A quick glance revealed that they are all 2011 publications. I am
surprised to find that with so much work going on in semantic web where
ontologies serve at the key building blocks, there is not much available
to address the migration issue. Have people done it mostly the hard way
in the past, or have they done it right the first time?

Does this mean that the plug-ins are available only for 4.0? Should I
migrate to 4.0? How will the move impact the current code I have? How
different is the Manchester API from Protege's OWL-API?

Thanks again for your help.

Girish



Message: 4
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 16:10:33 -0800
From: Matthew Horridge<[hidden email]>
To: User support for Core Protege and the Protege-Frames editor
<[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [protege-discussion] maintaining ontologies
Message-ID:<[hidden email]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1

Hi Girish,

This is quite a big topic.  There is quite a lot of research on ontology
versioning and evolution and a fair number of tools that support tasks
related to these topics.  Here are some things related to Protege 4....

Some recent work, that is very nice, is work by Rafael Gon?alves at the
university of Manchester - he looks at analysing changes between
different versions of ontologies.  Here's a pointer to various
publications on this:

http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~goncalvj/publications.html

Timothy Redmond and Natasha Noy have also done some recent work in this
area and have produced a Protege 4 plugin.  Here's their paper

http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-784/evodyn6.pdf

and here's their plugin

http://smi-protege.stanford.edu/repos/protege/protege4/plugins/org.protege.editor.owl.diff/trunk/ 


There's also the OWLDiff plugin:

http://protegewiki.stanford.edu/wiki/OWLDiff


In terms of versioning with SVN, there were some recent posts on the
Protege mailing lists about this.  A search through the archives should
reveal some interesting posts.

Cheers,

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

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

Re: protege-discussion Digest, Vol 64, Issue 14

Girish Joglekar
In reply to this post by Girish Joglekar
Hi Matthew,

Thank you very much for the pointers. I will certainly study the papers.
A quick glance revealed that they are all 2011 publications. I am
surprised to find that with so much work going on in semantic web where
ontologies serve at the key building blocks, there is not much available
to address the migration issue. Have people done it mostly the hard way
in the past, or have they done it right the first time?

Does this mean that the plug-ins are available only for 4.0? Should I
migrate to 4.0? How will the move impact the current code I have? How
different is the Manchester API from Protege's OWL-API?

Thanks again for your help.

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

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

Re: protege-discussion Digest, Vol 64, Issue 14

Matthew Horridge-2
Administrator
Hi Girish,

Yes, this work represents some of the latest work in this area.  I was also speaking with my Protege 4 hat on.  If you're interested in using Protege 3, or Frames, then there is of course PROMPT by Natasha Noy.  Take a look at this wiki page

http://protege.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?Prompt

and here are some publications that are related to PROMPT.

Natalya Fridman Noy and Mark A. Musen
PROMPT: Algorithm and Tool for Automated Ontology Merging and Alignment

Natalya Fridman Noy and Mark A. Musen
PROMPTDIFF: A Fixed-Point Algorithm for Comparing Ontology Versions

Cheers,

Matthew

 

On 11 Nov 2011, at 06:44, Girish Joglekar wrote:

> Hi Matthew,
>
> Thank you very much for the pointers. I will certainly study the papers. A quick glance revealed that they are all 2011 publications. I am surprised to find that with so much work going on in semantic web where ontologies serve at the key building blocks, there is not much available to address the migration issue. Have people done it mostly the hard way in the past, or have they done it right the first time?
>
> Does this mean that the plug-ins are available only for 4.0? Should I migrate to 4.0? How will the move impact the current code I have? How different is the Manchester API from Protege's OWL-API?
>
> Thanks again for your help.
>
> Girish
> _______________________________________________
> protege-discussion mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-discussion
>
> Instructions for unsubscribing: http://protege.stanford.edu/doc/faq.html#01a.03

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

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