import question

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

import question

David Makovoz
I have the following in my ontology file:

  <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://www.aciedge.com/ontologies/cg.owl">
    <owl:imports
rdf:resource="http://www.aciedge.com/ontologies/multiResolutionalBayesian.owl"/>
    <owl:versionIRI rdf:resource="http://www.aciedge.com/ontologies/cg.owl"/>
    <rdf:type rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#Ontology"/>
  </rdf:Description>

When I try to open it in Protege, I get the following error
Ontology already exists.
<http://www.aciedge.com/ontologies/multiResolutionalBayesian.owl>

When I replace the above with seemingly equivalent

    <owl:Ontology rdf:about="http://www.aciedge.com/ontologies/cg.owl">
        <owl:versionIRI rdf:resource="http://www.aciedge.com/ontologies/cg.owl"/>
        <owl:imports
rdf:resource="http://www.aciedge.com/ontologies/multiResolutionalBayesian.owl"/>
    </owl:Ontology>

everything works fine.

What am I missing?

Thank you,

David
 

_______________________________________________
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: import question

Thomas Russ

On Feb 23, 2011, at 1:36 PM, David Makovoz wrote:

> I have the following in my ontology file:
>
>  <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://www.aciedge.com/ontologies/ 
> cg.owl">
>    <owl:imports
> rdf:resource="http://www.aciedge.com/ontologies/multiResolutionalBayesian.owl 
> "/>
>    <owl:versionIRI rdf:resource="http://www.aciedge.com/ontologies/cg.owl 
> "/>
>    <rdf:type rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#Ontology"/>
>  </rdf:Description>
>
> When I try to open it in Protege, I get the following error
> Ontology already exists.
> <http://www.aciedge.com/ontologies/multiResolutionalBayesian.owl>
>
> When I replace the above with seemingly equivalent
>
>    <owl:Ontology rdf:about="http://www.aciedge.com/ontologies/cg.owl">
>        <owl:versionIRI rdf:resource="http://www.aciedge.com/ontologies/cg.owl 
> "/>
>        <owl:imports
> rdf:resource="http://www.aciedge.com/ontologies/multiResolutionalBayesian.owl 
> "/>
>    </owl:Ontology>
>
> everything works fine.
>
> What am I missing?

It is probably a pragmatic issue with the order of parsing and the  
creation of objects.  I suspect that what may be happening in the  
first case is that a general RDF Description is created and it is  
later coerced into being of type Ontology.  But when that type change  
is happening, it has already been created, and so there is a failure.  
In the second case, an object of the proper type is created right away  
and there is no conflict.


_______________________________________________
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: import question

David Makovoz
The thing is that if I remove the owl:imports node by hand, i.e. if I have 

  <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://www.aciedge.com/ontologies/cg.owl">
 <owl:versionIRI rdf:resource="http://www.aciedge.com/ontologies/cg.owl"/>
<rdf:type rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#Ontology"/>
 </rdf:Description>

everything works fine. Does it make sense? 

Thanks,

David



On Feb 23, 2011, at 1:36 PM, David Makovoz wrote:

> I have the following in my ontology file:
>
>  <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://www.aciedge.com/ontologies/cg.owl">
>    <owl:imports
> rdf:resource="http://www.aciedge.com/ontologies/multiResolutionalBayesian.owl"/>
>    <owl:versionIRI rdf:resource="http://www.aciedge.com/ontologies/cg.owl"/>
>    <rdf:type rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#Ontology"/>
>  </rdf:Description>
>
> When I try to open it in Protege, I get the following error
> Ontology already exists.
> <http://www.aciedge.com/ontologies/multiResolutionalBayesian.owl>
>
> When I replace the above with seemingly equivalent
>
>    <owl:Ontology rdf:about="http://www.aciedge.com/ontologies/cg.owl">
>        <owl:versionIRI rdf:resource="http://www.aciedge.com/ontologies/cg.owl"/>
>        <owl:imports
> rdf:resource="http://www.aciedge.com/ontologies/multiResolutionalBayesian.owl"/>
>    </owl:Ontology>
>
> everything works fine.
>
> What am I missing?

It is probably a pragmatic issue with the order of parsing and the creation of objects.  I suspect that what may be happening in the first case is that a general RDF Description is created and it is later coerced into being of type Ontology.  But when that type change is happening, it has already been created, and so there is a failure.  In the second case, an object of the proper type is created right away and there is no conflict.




_______________________________________________
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: import question

Timothy Redmond

I meant to respond to this before.  This looks like a clear bug.  The order of the triples shouldn't matter.  Given the difficulty of calculating the name of an OWL ontology in RDF format, this is worth trying to replicate and report.   Are you using Protege 4.1 and do you get the same results with the latest release of Protege?

I gave it a try but I couldn't resolve the

http://www.aciedge.com/ontologies/multiResolutionalBayesian.owl

import.  Is this ontology contained in a file on your drive?  I will try to replicate this problem.

-Timothy


On 02/25/2011 07:53 AM, David Makovoz wrote:
The thing is that if I remove the owl:imports node by hand, i.e. if I have 

  <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://www.aciedge.com/ontologies/cg.owl">
 <owl:versionIRI rdf:resource="http://www.aciedge.com/ontologies/cg.owl"/>
<rdf:type rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#Ontology"/>
 </rdf:Description>

everything works fine. Does it make sense? 

Thanks,

David



On Feb 23, 2011, at 1:36 PM, David Makovoz wrote:

> I have the following in my ontology file:
>
>  <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://www.aciedge.com/ontologies/cg.owl">
>    <owl:imports
> rdf:resource="http://www.aciedge.com/ontologies/multiResolutionalBayesian.owl"/>
>    <owl:versionIRI rdf:resource="http://www.aciedge.com/ontologies/cg.owl"/>
>    <rdf:type rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#Ontology"/>
>  </rdf:Description>
>
> When I try to open it in Protege, I get the following error
> Ontology already exists.
> <http://www.aciedge.com/ontologies/multiResolutionalBayesian.owl>
>
> When I replace the above with seemingly equivalent
>
>    <owl:Ontology rdf:about="http://www.aciedge.com/ontologies/cg.owl">
>        <owl:versionIRI rdf:resource="http://www.aciedge.com/ontologies/cg.owl"/>
>        <owl:imports
> rdf:resource="http://www.aciedge.com/ontologies/multiResolutionalBayesian.owl"/>
>    </owl:Ontology>
>
> everything works fine.
>
> What am I missing?

It is probably a pragmatic issue with the order of parsing and the creation of objects.  I suspect that what may be happening in the first case is that a general RDF Description is created and it is later coerced into being of type Ontology.  But when that type change is happening, it has already been created, and so there is a failure.  In the second case, an object of the proper type is created right away and there is no conflict.



_______________________________________________ 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
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: import question

David Makovoz
Yes, is an import file that is in the same directory as the file I am trying to load.
What's in that file is not important. 
The problem is the order to owl:imports and rdf:type tags.
I have created a minimal example shown below of what works and what doesn't. 

Thanks,

David

THIS DOES NOT WORK
<rdf:RDF
    xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
    xmlns:owl="http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#"
    xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#"
    xmlns:rdfs="http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#" > 
 <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://www.aciedge.com/ontologies/cg.owl">
      <owl:imports rdf:resource="http://www.aciedge.com/ontologies/multiResolutionalBayesian.owl"/>
      <owl:versionIRI rdf:resource="http://www.aciedge.com/ontologies/cg.owl"/>
    <rdf:type rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#Ontology"/>
  </rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>


THIS WORKS
<rdf:RDF
    xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
    xmlns:owl="http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#"
    xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#"
    xmlns:rdfs="http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#" > 
 <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://www.aciedge.com/ontologies/cg.owl">
   <owl:versionIRI rdf:resource="http://www.aciedge.com/ontologies/cg.owl"/>
    <rdf:type rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#Ontology"/>
    <owl:imports rdf:resource="http://www.aciedge.com/ontologies/multiResolutionalBayesian.owl"/>
   </rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>

--- On Fri, 2/25/11, Timothy Redmond <[hidden email]> wrote:



I meant to respond to this before.  This looks like a clear bug.  The order of the triples shouldn't matter.  Given the difficulty of calculating the name of an OWL ontology in RDF format, this is worth trying to replicate and report.   Are you using Protege 4.1 and do you get the same results with the latest release of Protege?

I gave it a try but I couldn't resolve the

http://www.aciedge.com/ontologies/multiResolutionalBayesian.owl

import.  Is this ontology contained in a file on your drive?  I will try to replicate this problem.

-Timothy




_______________________________________________
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: import question

David Makovoz
To answer your first question, I am using Protege, Version 4.1.0 Build 203, and I didn't  try the latest release of Protege. 

Yes, it is an import file that is in the same directory as the file I am trying to load.
What's in that file is not important. 
The problem is the order of owl:imports and rdf:type tags.
I have created a minimal example shown below of what works and what doesn't. 

Thanks,

David

THIS DOES NOT WORK
<rdf:RDF
 
      http://www.aciedge.com/ontologies/multiResolutionalBayesian.owl"/>
      http://www.aciedge.com/ontologies/cg.owl"/>
    http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#Ontology"/>
  </rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>


THIS WORKS
<rdf:RDF
 
   http://www.aciedge.com/ontologies/cg.owl"/>
    http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#Ontology"/>
    http://www.aciedge.com/ontologies/multiResolutionalBayesian.owl"/>
   </rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>

--- On Fri, 2/25/11, Timothy Redmond <[hidden email]> wrote:



I meant to respond to this before.  This looks like a clear bug.  The order of the triples shouldn't matter.  Given the difficulty of calculating the name of an OWL ontology in RDF format, this is worth trying to replicate and report.   Are you using Protege 4.1 and do you get the same results with the latest release of Protege?

I gave it a try but I couldn't resolve the

http://www.aciedge.com/ontologies/multiResolutionalBayesian.owl

import.  Is this ontology contained in a file on your drive?  I will try to replicate this problem.

-Timothy





_______________________________________________
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: import question

Timothy Redmond

I was just checking this issue and this bug does not appear in the latest release.  I see the same behavior that you are describing on build 203 but not for build 218.

-Timothy


On 02/25/2011 11:30 AM, David Makovoz wrote:
To answer your first question, I am using Protege, Version 4.1.0 Build 203, and I didn't  try the latest release of Protege. 

Yes, it is an import file that is in the same directory as the file I am trying to load.
What's in that file is not important. 
The problem is the order of owl:imports and rdf:type tags.
I have created a minimal example shown below of what works and what doesn't. 

Thanks,

David

THIS DOES NOT WORK
<rdf:RDF
 
  </rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>



--- On Fri, 2/25/11, Timothy Redmond [hidden email] wrote:



I meant to respond to this before.  This looks like a clear bug.  The order of the triples shouldn't matter.  Given the difficulty of calculating the name of an OWL ontology in RDF format, this is worth trying to replicate and report.   Are you using Protege 4.1 and do you get the same results with the latest release of Protege?

I gave it a try but I couldn't resolve the

http://www.aciedge.com/ontologies/multiResolutionalBayesian.owl

import.  Is this ontology contained in a file on your drive?  I will try to replicate this problem.

-Timothy




_______________________________________________ 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