[protege-owl] rdf:about vs. rdf:ID , what is the difference ?

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

[protege-owl] rdf:about vs. rdf:ID , what is the difference ?

Schober-2
Hi all,
What is the difference between  rdf:about and rdf:ID  when defining owl
classes? When is which one constructed by protege?
This was posted before, but no answer was provided on the protege owl list.
E.G.:
<owl:Class rdf:about="#FUGO_47">
    <rdfs:label rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string"
    >instrument</rdfs:label>
    <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="#FUGO_35"/>
  </owl:Class>
 
  and
 
 <owl:Class rdf:ID="FUGO_3">
     <rdfs:label rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string"
     >characteristic</rdfs:label>
     <rdfs:subClassOf>
       <owl:Class rdf:about="#FUGO_2"/>
     </rdfs:subClassOf>
     <rdfs:label rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string"
     >measurable_entity</rdfs:label>
     <rdfs:comment rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string"
     >a dependant enduring entity which can be measured;  syn:  
measurable entity</rdfs:comment>
  </owl:Class>

Cheers, Daniel.

--
Daniel Schober
Ontologist, FuGO-Project

The European Bioinformatics Institute   email:  [hidden email]
EMBL Outstation - Hinxton               direct: +44 (0)1223 494410
Wellcome Trust Genome Campus            fax: +44 (0)1223 494 468
Cambridge CB10 1SD, UK                
Project page: www.ebi.ac.uk/microarray/Projects/tox-nutri/index.html
Personal Page: http://www.ebi.ac.uk/Information/Staff/person_maint.php?s_person_id=734
Room: A2-37

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe go to http://protege.stanford.edu/community/subscribe.html

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[protege-owl] Re: rdf:about vs. rdf:ID , what is the difference ?

John Goodwin
The main different is the "#"

You will have rdf:ID="A", rdf:about="#A"

Back in ye olde days before Protégé was invented I occasionally wrote DAML+OIL (what OWL evolved from) ontologies in notepad and when I created a new class, property or individual I used rdf:ID. If I wanted to say something else about a previous created class in an axiom I would use rdf:about.

I don't think it really matters though, for example SWOOP seems to only use rdf:about. Probably not good for your sanity to worry too much about the raw OWL rdf/xml code.

John
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email]
> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Schober
> Sent: 14 June 2006 12:51
> To: [hidden email]; Marco Brandizi; Liju Fan;
> Fragoso, Gilberto (NIH/NCI) [E]
> Subject: [protege-owl] rdf:about vs. rdf:ID , what is the difference ?
>
> Hi all,
> What is the difference between  rdf:about and rdf:ID  when
> defining owl classes? When is which one constructed by protege?
> This was posted before, but no answer was provided on the
> protege owl list.
> E.G.:
> <owl:Class rdf:about="#FUGO_47">
>     <rdfs:label rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string"
>     >instrument</rdfs:label>
>     <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="#FUGO_35"/>
>   </owl:Class>
>  
>   and
>  
>  <owl:Class rdf:ID="FUGO_3">
>      <rdfs:label
> rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string"
>      >characteristic</rdfs:label>
>      <rdfs:subClassOf>
>        <owl:Class rdf:about="#FUGO_2"/>
>      </rdfs:subClassOf>
>      <rdfs:label
> rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string"
>      >measurable_entity</rdfs:label>
>      <rdfs:comment
> rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string"
>      >a dependant enduring entity which can be measured;  syn:  
> measurable entity</rdfs:comment>
>   </owl:Class>
>
> Cheers, Daniel.
>
> --
> Daniel Schober
> Ontologist, FuGO-Project
>
> The European Bioinformatics Institute   email:  [hidden email]
> EMBL Outstation - Hinxton               direct: +44 (0)1223 494410
> Wellcome Trust Genome Campus            fax: +44 (0)1223 494 468
> Cambridge CB10 1SD, UK                
> Project page: www.ebi.ac.uk/microarray/Projects/tox-nutri/index.html
> Personal Page:
> http://www.ebi.ac.uk/Information/Staff/person_maint.php?s_pers
> on_id=734
> Room: A2-37
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> -----------
> To unsubscribe go to
> http://protege.stanford.edu/community/subscribe.html
>
>
.


This email is only intended for the person to whom it is addressed and may contain confidential information. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this email which must not be copied, distributed or disclosed to any other person.

Unless stated otherwise, the contents of this email are personal to the writer and do not represent the official view of Ordnance Survey. Nor can any contract be formed on Ordnance Survey's behalf via email. We reserve the right to monitor emails and attachments without prior notice.

Thank you for your cooperation.

Ordnance Survey
Romsey Road
Southampton SO16 4GU
Tel: 023 8079 2000
http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe go to http://protege.stanford.edu/community/subscribe.html

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[protege-owl] Re: rdf:about vs. rdf:ID , what is the difference ?

Olivier Dameron
In reply to this post by Schober-2
On Wed, 14 Jun 2006 12:51:26 +0100, Schober <[hidden email]> wrote:

> What is the difference between  rdf:about and rdf:ID  when defining
> owl classes? When is which one constructed by protege?

There is a nice explanation of the difference between the two at:
http://esw.w3.org/mt/esw/archives/000034.html

Cheers,
Olivier
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe go to http://protege.stanford.edu/community/subscribe.html

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[protege-owl] RE : Re: rdf:about vs. rdf:ID , what is the difference ?

POPESCU Adrian 211643 Thésard
In reply to this post by John Goodwin
Hi,
I am quite new with OWL and I might be wrong, but in my understanding, things are like this:
- rdf:ID is used to define a class
- rdf:about is used when wanting to add information to a defined class (instantiate some properties for such a class)
- rdf:resource is used when mentioning a defined class in relation to other classes (e.g. to say that the two are disjoint)
I use rdf:ID, rdf:about and rdf:resource as described here to generate OWL files and when loading it into protégé, I don't get any warning so I suppose it's ok.
Hope this helps,
Adrian
-----Message d'origine-----
De : [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] De la part de John Goodwin
Envoyé : mercredi 14 juin 2006 14:01
À : [hidden email]
Objet : [protege-owl] Re: rdf:about vs. rdf:ID , what is the difference ?

The main different is the "#"

You will have rdf:ID="A", rdf:about="#A"

Back in ye olde days before Protégé was invented I occasionally wrote DAML+OIL (what OWL evolved from) ontologies in notepad and when I created a new class, property or individual I used rdf:ID. If I wanted to say something else about a previous created class in an axiom I would use rdf:about.

I don't think it really matters though, for example SWOOP seems to only use rdf:about. Probably not good for your sanity to worry too much about the raw OWL rdf/xml code.

John
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email]
> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Schober
> Sent: 14 June 2006 12:51
> To: [hidden email]; Marco Brandizi; Liju Fan;
> Fragoso, Gilberto (NIH/NCI) [E]
> Subject: [protege-owl] rdf:about vs. rdf:ID , what is the difference ?
>
> Hi all,
> What is the difference between  rdf:about and rdf:ID  when
> defining owl classes? When is which one constructed by protege?
> This was posted before, but no answer was provided on the
> protege owl list.
> E.G.:
> <owl:Class rdf:about="#FUGO_47">
>     <rdfs:label rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string"
>     >instrument</rdfs:label>
>     <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="#FUGO_35"/>
>   </owl:Class>
>  
>   and
>  
>  <owl:Class rdf:ID="FUGO_3">
>      <rdfs:label
> rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string"
>      >characteristic</rdfs:label>
>      <rdfs:subClassOf>
>        <owl:Class rdf:about="#FUGO_2"/>
>      </rdfs:subClassOf>
>      <rdfs:label
> rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string"
>      >measurable_entity</rdfs:label>
>      <rdfs:comment
> rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string"
>      >a dependant enduring entity which can be measured;  syn:  
> measurable entity</rdfs:comment>
>   </owl:Class>
>
> Cheers, Daniel.
>
> --
> Daniel Schober
> Ontologist, FuGO-Project
>
> The European Bioinformatics Institute   email:  [hidden email]
> EMBL Outstation - Hinxton               direct: +44 (0)1223 494410
> Wellcome Trust Genome Campus            fax: +44 (0)1223 494 468
> Cambridge CB10 1SD, UK                
> Project page: www.ebi.ac.uk/microarray/Projects/tox-nutri/index.html
> Personal Page:
> http://www.ebi.ac.uk/Information/Staff/person_maint.php?s_pers
> on_id=734
> Room: A2-37
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> -----------
> To unsubscribe go to
> http://protege.stanford.edu/community/subscribe.html
>
>
.


This email is only intended for the person to whom it is addressed and may contain confidential information. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this email which must not be copied, distributed or disclosed to any other person.

Unless stated otherwise, the contents of this email are personal to the writer and do not represent the official view of Ordnance Survey. Nor can any contract be formed on Ordnance Survey's behalf via email. We reserve the right to monitor emails and attachments without prior notice.

Thank you for your cooperation.

Ordnance Survey
Romsey Road
Southampton SO16 4GU
Tel: 023 8079 2000
http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe go to http://protege.stanford.edu/community/subscribe.html

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe go to http://protege.stanford.edu/community/subscribe.html

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[protege-owl] Re: RE : Re: rdf:about vs. rdf:ID , what is the difference ?

John Goodwin

That's what I wanted to say, but you put it better :)

John

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email]
> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of
> POPESCU Adrian 211643 Thésard
> Sent: 14 June 2006 13:21
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: [protege-owl] RE : Re: rdf:about vs. rdf:ID , what
> is the difference ?
>
> Hi,
> I am quite new with OWL and I might be wrong, but in my
> understanding, things are like this:
> - rdf:ID is used to define a class
> - rdf:about is used when wanting to add information to a
> defined class (instantiate some properties for such a class)
> - rdf:resource is used when mentioning a defined class in
> relation to other classes (e.g. to say that the two are
> disjoint) I use rdf:ID, rdf:about and rdf:resource as
> described here to generate OWL files and when loading it into
> protégé, I don't get any warning so I suppose it's ok.
> Hope this helps,
> Adrian
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : [hidden email]
> [mailto:[hidden email]] De la part de
> John Goodwin Envoyé : mercredi 14 juin 2006 14:01 À :
> [hidden email] Objet : [protege-owl] Re:
> rdf:about vs. rdf:ID , what is the difference ?
>
> The main different is the "#"
>
> You will have rdf:ID="A", rdf:about="#A"
>
> Back in ye olde days before Protégé was invented I
> occasionally wrote DAML+OIL (what OWL evolved from)
> ontologies in notepad and when I created a new class,
> property or individual I used rdf:ID. If I wanted to say
> something else about a previous created class in an axiom I
> would use rdf:about.
>
> I don't think it really matters though, for example SWOOP
> seems to only use rdf:about. Probably not good for your
> sanity to worry too much about the raw OWL rdf/xml code.
>
> John
>  
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [hidden email]
> > [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Schober
> > Sent: 14 June 2006 12:51
> > To: [hidden email]; Marco Brandizi; Liju Fan;
> Fragoso,
> > Gilberto (NIH/NCI) [E]
> > Subject: [protege-owl] rdf:about vs. rdf:ID , what is the
> difference ?
> >
> > Hi all,
> > What is the difference between  rdf:about and rdf:ID  when defining
> > owl classes? When is which one constructed by protege?
> > This was posted before, but no answer was provided on the
> protege owl
> > list.
> > E.G.:
> > <owl:Class rdf:about="#FUGO_47">
> >     <rdfs:label
> rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string"
> >     >instrument</rdfs:label>
> >     <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="#FUGO_35"/>
> >   </owl:Class>
> >  
> >   and
> >  
> >  <owl:Class rdf:ID="FUGO_3">
> >      <rdfs:label
> > rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string"
> >      >characteristic</rdfs:label>
> >      <rdfs:subClassOf>
> >        <owl:Class rdf:about="#FUGO_2"/>
> >      </rdfs:subClassOf>
> >      <rdfs:label
> > rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string"
> >      >measurable_entity</rdfs:label>
> >      <rdfs:comment
> > rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string"
> >      >a dependant enduring entity which can be measured;  syn:  
> > measurable entity</rdfs:comment>
> >   </owl:Class>
> >
> > Cheers, Daniel.
> >
> > --
> > Daniel Schober
> > Ontologist, FuGO-Project
> >
> > The European Bioinformatics Institute   email:  [hidden email]
> > EMBL Outstation - Hinxton               direct: +44 (0)1223 494410
> > Wellcome Trust Genome Campus            fax: +44 (0)1223 494 468
> > Cambridge CB10 1SD, UK                
> > Project page: www.ebi.ac.uk/microarray/Projects/tox-nutri/index.html
> > Personal Page:
> > http://www.ebi.ac.uk/Information/Staff/person_maint.php?s_pers
> > on_id=734
> > Room: A2-37
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------------
> > -----------
> > To unsubscribe go to
> > http://protege.stanford.edu/community/subscribe.html
> >
> >
> .
>
>
> This email is only intended for the person to whom it is
> addressed and may contain confidential information. If you
> have received this email in error, please notify the sender
> and delete this email which must not be copied, distributed
> or disclosed to any other person.
>
> Unless stated otherwise, the contents of this email are
> personal to the writer and do not represent the official view
> of Ordnance Survey. Nor can any contract be formed on
> Ordnance Survey's behalf via email. We reserve the right to
> monitor emails and attachments without prior notice.
>
> Thank you for your cooperation.
>
> Ordnance Survey
> Romsey Road
> Southampton SO16 4GU
> Tel: 023 8079 2000
> http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> -----------
> To unsubscribe go to
> http://protege.stanford.edu/community/subscribe.html
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> -----------
> To unsubscribe go to
> http://protege.stanford.edu/community/subscribe.html
>
>
.


This email is only intended for the person to whom it is addressed and may contain confidential information. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this email which must not be copied, distributed or disclosed to any other person.

Unless stated otherwise, the contents of this email are personal to the writer and do not represent the official view of Ordnance Survey. Nor can any contract be formed on Ordnance Survey's behalf via email. We reserve the right to monitor emails and attachments without prior notice.

Thank you for your cooperation.

Ordnance Survey
Romsey Road
Southampton SO16 4GU
Tel: 023 8079 2000
http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe go to http://protege.stanford.edu/community/subscribe.html

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[protege-owl] Re: RE : Re: rdf:about vs. rdf:ID , what is the difference ?

whetzel-2
In reply to this post by POPESCU Adrian 211643 Thésard
Since rdf:ID and rdf:about are not used consistently in OWL files
generated from Protege/OWL, what is the best way to parse the file to get
all elements, e.g. class, property, definitions, relationships etc.?

Trish

> I am quite new with OWL and I might be wrong, but in my understanding, things are like this:
> - rdf:ID is used to define a class
> - rdf:about is used when wanting to add information to a defined class (instantiate some properties for such a class)
> - rdf:resource is used when mentioning a defined class in relation to other classes (e.g. to say that the two are disjoint)
> I use rdf:ID, rdf:about and rdf:resource as described here to generate OWL files and when loading it into protégé, I don't get any warning so I suppose it's ok.
> Hope this helps,
> Adrian
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] De la part de John Goodwin
> Envoyé : mercredi 14 juin 2006 14:01
> À : [hidden email]
> Objet : [protege-owl] Re: rdf:about vs. rdf:ID , what is the difference ?
>
> The main different is the "#"
>
> You will have rdf:ID="A", rdf:about="#A"
>
> Back in ye olde days before Protégé was invented I occasionally wrote DAML+OIL (what OWL evolved from) ontologies in notepad and when I created a new class, property or individual I used rdf:ID. If I wanted to say something else about a previous created class in an axiom I would use rdf:about.
>
> I don't think it really matters though, for example SWOOP seems to only use rdf:about. Probably not good for your sanity to worry too much about the raw OWL rdf/xml code.
>
> John
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [hidden email]
>> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Schober
>> Sent: 14 June 2006 12:51
>> To: [hidden email]; Marco Brandizi; Liju Fan;
>> Fragoso, Gilberto (NIH/NCI) [E]
>> Subject: [protege-owl] rdf:about vs. rdf:ID , what is the difference ?
>>
>> Hi all,
>> What is the difference between  rdf:about and rdf:ID  when
>> defining owl classes? When is which one constructed by protege?
>> This was posted before, but no answer was provided on the
>> protege owl list.
>> E.G.:
>> <owl:Class rdf:about="#FUGO_47">
>>     <rdfs:label rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string"
>>    >instrument</rdfs:label>
>>     <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="#FUGO_35"/>
>>   </owl:Class>
>>
>>   and
>>
>>  <owl:Class rdf:ID="FUGO_3">
>>      <rdfs:label
>> rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string"
>>     >characteristic</rdfs:label>
>>      <rdfs:subClassOf>
>>        <owl:Class rdf:about="#FUGO_2"/>
>>      </rdfs:subClassOf>
>>      <rdfs:label
>> rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string"
>>     >measurable_entity</rdfs:label>
>>      <rdfs:comment
>> rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string"
>>     >a dependant enduring entity which can be measured;  syn:
>> measurable entity</rdfs:comment>
>>   </owl:Class>
>>
>> Cheers, Daniel.
>>
>> --
>> Daniel Schober
>> Ontologist, FuGO-Project
>>
>> The European Bioinformatics Institute   email:  [hidden email]
>> EMBL Outstation - Hinxton               direct: +44 (0)1223 494410
>> Wellcome Trust Genome Campus            fax: +44 (0)1223 494 468
>> Cambridge CB10 1SD, UK
>> Project page: www.ebi.ac.uk/microarray/Projects/tox-nutri/index.html
>> Personal Page:
>> http://www.ebi.ac.uk/Information/Staff/person_maint.php?s_pers
>> on_id=734
>> Room: A2-37
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------
>> -----------
>> To unsubscribe go to
>> http://protege.stanford.edu/community/subscribe.html
>>
>>
> .
>
>
> This email is only intended for the person to whom it is addressed and may contain confidential information. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this email which must not be copied, distributed or disclosed to any other person.
>
> Unless stated otherwise, the contents of this email are personal to the writer and do not represent the official view of Ordnance Survey. Nor can any contract be formed on Ordnance Survey's behalf via email. We reserve the right to monitor emails and attachments without prior notice.
>
> Thank you for your cooperation.
>
> Ordnance Survey
> Romsey Road
> Southampton SO16 4GU
> Tel: 023 8079 2000
> http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe go to http://protege.stanford.edu/community/subscribe.html
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe go to http://protege.stanford.edu/community/subscribe.html
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[protege-owl] RE : Re: RE : Re: rdf:about vs. rdf:ID , what is the difference ?

POPESCU Adrian 211643 Thésard
Hi,
I think there are no inconsistencies in the manner rdf:ID and rdf:about are used in an OWL file and I think it is possible to parse the file in order to get information from it. I don't know if there is a best way to do it, but here is one proposition:
-to get all defined classes, you can search for the string: owl:Class rdf:ID
-to get all object properties, you can search for owl:ObjectProperty rdf:ID. For the other property types it goes the same.
-it is a bit more difficult to get relationships but, with proper querying, I think this can be done. Hereafter, one example for "isA" relation. If you have the code:
"<owl:Class rdf:ID="ThinAndCrispyBase">
    <rdfs:subClassOf>
      <owl:Class rdf:ID="PizzaBase"/>
    </rdfs:subClassOf>
    <owl:disjointWith>
      <owl:Class rdf:ID="DeepPanBase"/>
    </owl:disjointWith>
  </owl:Class>"
you can find its start (<owl:Class) and end (</owl) delimiters and, restrain your search between the two and find the part of the code between     <rdfs:subClassOf> and </rdfs:subClassOf>. Than, in this part of the code, you search for rdf:ID, rdf:about or rdf:resource, you localize the string between in quotations (if necessary eliminate #)  and you have the parent class.
I think you can work similarly for all other relations.
All the above is not optimized in terms of algorithms but that don't hurts much I think.
Adrian



-----Message d'origine-----
De : [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] De la part de Trish Whetzel
Envoyé : mercredi 14 juin 2006 23:34
À : [hidden email]
Objet : [protege-owl] Re: RE : Re: rdf:about vs. rdf:ID , what is the difference ?

Since rdf:ID and rdf:about are not used consistently in OWL files
generated from Protege/OWL, what is the best way to parse the file to get
all elements, e.g. class, property, definitions, relationships etc.?

Trish


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe go to http://protege.stanford.edu/community/subscribe.html

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[protege-owl] Re: RE : Re: rdf:about vs. rdf:ID , what is the difference ?

Alan Ruttenberg-2
In reply to this post by whetzel-2
Best way is to use an API to do the parsing. Parsing the XML directly  
is, to say the least, involved (http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-parsing/).  
I use Pellet(http://www.mindswap.org/2003/pellet/), which uses the  
OWLAPI (http://sourceforge.net/projects/owlapi) or Jena (http://
jena.sourceforge.net/), but there is a Protege API(http://
protege.stanford.edu/plugins/owl/api/) as well. But you might want  
instead to use  a reasoner API, e.g. DIG(http://dl.kr.org/dig/ 
interface.html)  or direct calls to Pellet so that you can get the  
inferences as well.

Regards,
-Alan

On Jun 14, 2006, at 5:33 PM, Trish Whetzel wrote:

> Since rdf:ID and rdf:about are not used consistently in OWL files  
> generated from Protege/OWL, what is the best way to parse the file  
> to get all elements, e.g. class, property, definitions,  
> relationships etc.?
>
> Trish
>
>> I am quite new with OWL and I might be wrong, but in my  
>> understanding, things are like this:
>> - rdf:ID is used to define a class
>> - rdf:about is used when wanting to add information to a defined  
>> class (instantiate some properties for such a class)
>> - rdf:resource is used when mentioning a defined class in relation  
>> to other classes (e.g. to say that the two are disjoint)
>> I use rdf:ID, rdf:about and rdf:resource as described here to  
>> generate OWL files and when loading it into protégé, I don't get  
>> any warning so I suppose it's ok.
>> Hope this helps,
>> Adrian
>> -----Message d'origine-----
>> De : [hidden email] [mailto:protege-owl-
>> [hidden email]] De la part de John Goodwin
>> Envoyé : mercredi 14 juin 2006 14:01
>> À : [hidden email]
>> Objet : [protege-owl] Re: rdf:about vs. rdf:ID , what is the  
>> difference ?
>>
>> The main different is the "#"
>>
>> You will have rdf:ID="A", rdf:about="#A"
>>
>> Back in ye olde days before Protégé was invented I occasionally  
>> wrote DAML+OIL (what OWL evolved from) ontologies in notepad and  
>> when I created a new class, property or individual I used rdf:ID.  
>> If I wanted to say something else about a previous created class  
>> in an axiom I would use rdf:about.
>>
>> I don't think it really matters though, for example SWOOP seems to  
>> only use rdf:about. Probably not good for your sanity to worry too  
>> much about the raw OWL rdf/xml code.
>>
>> John
>>
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: [hidden email]
>>> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Schober
>>> Sent: 14 June 2006 12:51
>>> To: [hidden email]; Marco Brandizi; Liju Fan;
>>> Fragoso, Gilberto (NIH/NCI) [E]
>>> Subject: [protege-owl] rdf:about vs. rdf:ID , what is the  
>>> difference ?
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>> What is the difference between  rdf:about and rdf:ID  when
>>> defining owl classes? When is which one constructed by protege?
>>> This was posted before, but no answer was provided on the
>>> protege owl list.
>>> E.G.:
>>> <owl:Class rdf:about="#FUGO_47">
>>>     <rdfs:label rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/ 
>>> XMLSchema#string"
>>>    >instrument</rdfs:label>
>>>     <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="#FUGO_35"/>
>>>   </owl:Class>
>>>
>>>   and
>>>
>>>  <owl:Class rdf:ID="FUGO_3">
>>>      <rdfs:label
>>> rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string"
>>>     >characteristic</rdfs:label>
>>>      <rdfs:subClassOf>
>>>        <owl:Class rdf:about="#FUGO_2"/>
>>>      </rdfs:subClassOf>
>>>      <rdfs:label
>>> rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string"
>>>     >measurable_entity</rdfs:label>
>>>      <rdfs:comment
>>> rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string"
>>>     >a dependant enduring entity which can be measured;  syn:
>>> measurable entity</rdfs:comment>
>>>   </owl:Class>
>>>
>>> Cheers, Daniel.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Daniel Schober
>>> Ontologist, FuGO-Project
>>>
>>> The European Bioinformatics Institute   email:  [hidden email]
>>> EMBL Outstation - Hinxton               direct: +44 (0)1223 494410
>>> Wellcome Trust Genome Campus            fax: +44 (0)1223 494 468
>>> Cambridge CB10 1SD, UK
>>> Project page: www.ebi.ac.uk/microarray/Projects/tox-nutri/index.html
>>> Personal Page:
>>> http://www.ebi.ac.uk/Information/Staff/person_maint.php?s_pers
>>> on_id=734
>>> Room: A2-37
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------
>>> -----------
>>> To unsubscribe go to
>>> http://protege.stanford.edu/community/subscribe.html
>>>
>>>
>> .
>>
>>
>> This email is only intended for the person to whom it is addressed  
>> and may contain confidential information. If you have received  
>> this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this  
>> email which must not be copied, distributed or disclosed to any  
>> other person.
>>
>> Unless stated otherwise, the contents of this email are personal  
>> to the writer and do not represent the official view of Ordnance  
>> Survey. Nor can any contract be formed on Ordnance Survey's behalf  
>> via email. We reserve the right to monitor emails and attachments  
>> without prior notice.
>>
>> Thank you for your cooperation.
>>
>> Ordnance Survey
>> Romsey Road
>> Southampton SO16 4GU
>> Tel: 023 8079 2000
>> http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> ----
>> To unsubscribe go to http://protege.stanford.edu/community/ 
>> subscribe.html
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> ----
>> To unsubscribe go to http://protege.stanford.edu/community/ 
>> subscribe.html

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe go to http://protege.stanford.edu/community/subscribe.html

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[protege-owl] Re: RE : Re: rdf:about vs. rdf:ID , what is the difference ?

Steve Wartik
In reply to this post by whetzel-2
Trish,

Is the use really inconsistent? In my observations of the OWL files, it
seems to me that the first mention of a name is always specified with
rdf:ID and subsequent mentions always use rdf:about. Have you seen
otherwise?

Steve Wartik

Trish Whetzel wrote:
> Since rdf:ID and rdf:about are not used consistently in OWL files
> generated from Protege/OWL, what is the best way to parse the file to
> get all elements, e.g. class, property, definitions, relationships etc.?
>
> Trish


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe go to http://protege.stanford.edu/community/subscribe.html

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[protege-owl] Re: RE : Re: rdf:about vs. rdf:ID , what is the difference ?

John Goodwin
Hi,

The XML can be very different. Consider a simple "B subclass of A".

Protégé:

    <owl:Class rdf:ID="A"/>
    <owl:Class rdf:ID="B">
        <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="#A"/>
    </owl:Class>

SWOOP:

  <owl:Class rdf:about="#B">
    <rdfs:subClassOf>
      <owl:Class rdf:about="#A"/>
    </rdfs:subClassOf>
  </owl:Class>
 
However, I think Alan is write - use Jena/Protégé OWL APIs for parsing. Otherwise, for the sake of your sanity it's best not to worry about the raw XML...unless of course your ontology editor of choice is vi :)

John


> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email]
> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of
> Steven Wartik
> Sent: 15 June 2006 14:48
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: [protege-owl] Re: RE : Re: rdf:about vs. rdf:ID ,
> what is the difference ?
>
> Trish,
>
> Is the use really inconsistent? In my observations of the OWL
> files, it seems to me that the first mention of a name is
> always specified with rdf:ID and subsequent mentions always
> use rdf:about. Have you seen otherwise?
>
> Steve Wartik
>
> Trish Whetzel wrote:
> > Since rdf:ID and rdf:about are not used consistently in OWL files
> > generated from Protege/OWL, what is the best way to parse
> the file to
> > get all elements, e.g. class, property, definitions,
> relationships etc.?
> >
> > Trish
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> -----------
> To unsubscribe go to
> http://protege.stanford.edu/community/subscribe.html
>
>
.


This email is only intended for the person to whom it is addressed and may contain confidential information. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this email which must not be copied, distributed or disclosed to any other person.

Unless stated otherwise, the contents of this email are personal to the writer and do not represent the official view of Ordnance Survey. Nor can any contract be formed on Ordnance Survey's behalf via email. We reserve the right to monitor emails and attachments without prior notice.

Thank you for your cooperation.

Ordnance Survey
Romsey Road
Southampton SO16 4GU
Tel: 023 8079 2000
http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe go to http://protege.stanford.edu/community/subscribe.html

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[protege-owl] Re: RE : Re: rdf:about vs. rdf:ID , what is the difference ?

Olivier Dameron
On Thu, 15 Jun 2006 15:01:52 +0100, "John Goodwin"
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> The XML can be very different. Consider a simple "B subclass of A".
>
> Protégé:
>
>     <owl:Class rdf:ID="A"/>
>     <owl:Class rdf:ID="B">
>         <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="#A"/>
>     </owl:Class>
>
> SWOOP:
>
>   <owl:Class rdf:about="#B">
>     <rdfs:subClassOf>
>       <owl:Class rdf:about="#A"/>
>     </rdfs:subClassOf>
>   </owl:Class>

Both syntaxes are perfectly correct and equivalent.
As with any rdf document, you definitely should rely on an API and
avoid by all mean doing some "syntaxic" parsing.
Olivier
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe go to http://protege.stanford.edu/community/subscribe.html

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[protege-owl] Re: RE : Re: rdf:about vs. rdf:ID , what is the difference ?

John Goodwin

> On Thu, 15 Jun 2006 15:01:52 +0100, "John Goodwin"
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > The XML can be very different. Consider a simple "B subclass of A".
> >
> > Protégé:
> >
> >     <owl:Class rdf:ID="A"/>
> >     <owl:Class rdf:ID="B">
> >         <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="#A"/>
> >     </owl:Class>
> >
> > SWOOP:
> >
> >   <owl:Class rdf:about="#B">
> >     <rdfs:subClassOf>
> >       <owl:Class rdf:about="#A"/>
> >     </rdfs:subClassOf>
> >   </owl:Class>
>
> Both syntaxes are perfectly correct and equivalent.
> As with any rdf document, you definitely should rely on an
> API and avoid by all mean doing some "syntaxic" parsing.

Indeed - that's what this example was supposed to show.

john
.


This email is only intended for the person to whom it is addressed and may contain confidential information. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this email which must not be copied, distributed or disclosed to any other person.

Unless stated otherwise, the contents of this email are personal to the writer and do not represent the official view of Ordnance Survey. Nor can any contract be formed on Ordnance Survey's behalf via email. We reserve the right to monitor emails and attachments without prior notice.

Thank you for your cooperation.

Ordnance Survey
Romsey Road
Southampton SO16 4GU
Tel: 023 8079 2000
http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe go to http://protege.stanford.edu/community/subscribe.html

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[protege-owl] Re: RE : Re: RE : Re: rdf:about vs. rdf:ID , what is the difference ?

Olivier Dameron
In reply to this post by POPESCU Adrian 211643 Thésard
On Thu, 15 Jun 2006 09:24:38 +0200, POPESCU Adrian 211643 Thésard
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> I think it is possible to parse
> the file in order to get information from it. I don't know if there
> is a best way to do it, but here is one proposition:
> -to get all
> defined classes, you can search for the string: owl:Class rdf:ID
> -to
> get all object properties, you can search for owl:ObjectProperty
> rdf:ID.
> For the other property types it goes the same. -it is a bit
> more difficult to get relationships but, with proper querying, I
> think this can be done.

This is definitely *not* the way to go.
It would also be perfectly fine to have the following code, which
would make your parsing clumsy: <owl:Class rdf:nodeID="A">
  ...
</owl:Class>
<owl:Class rdf:nodeID="B">
  ...
</owl:Class>
<owl:Class rdf:about="#A">
  <rdf:subClassOf rdf:resource="#B"/>
</owl:Class>

I strongly encourage you to use an API. Others have spent considerable
efforts for parsing rdf efficiently, take advantage of it.

Good luck,
Olivier
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe go to http://protege.stanford.edu/community/subscribe.html

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[protege-owl] RE : Re: RE : Re: RE : Re: rdf:about vs. rdf:ID , what is the difference ?

POPESCU Adrian 211643 Thésard
You are right, sorry for the previous suggestion. The thing is that I have generated my OWL files that are obviously syntactically simpler than fully expressive RDF files. But even in this condition, your way is more appropriate to parse files.
Adrian

-----Message d'origine-----
De : [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] De la part de Olivier Dameron
Envoyé : jeudi 15 juin 2006 18:18
À : [hidden email]
Objet : [protege-owl] Re: RE : Re: RE : Re: rdf:about vs. rdf:ID , what is the difference ?

On Thu, 15 Jun 2006 09:24:38 +0200, POPESCU Adrian 211643 Thésard
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> I think it is possible to parse
> the file in order to get information from it. I don't know if there
> is a best way to do it, but here is one proposition:
> -to get all
> defined classes, you can search for the string: owl:Class rdf:ID
> -to
> get all object properties, you can search for owl:ObjectProperty
> rdf:ID.
> For the other property types it goes the same. -it is a bit
> more difficult to get relationships but, with proper querying, I
> think this can be done.

This is definitely *not* the way to go.
It would also be perfectly fine to have the following code, which
would make your parsing clumsy: <owl:Class rdf:nodeID="A">
  ...
</owl:Class>
<owl:Class rdf:nodeID="B">
  ...
</owl:Class>
<owl:Class rdf:about="#A">
  <rdf:subClassOf rdf:resource="#B"/>
</owl:Class>

I strongly encourage you to use an API. Others have spent considerable
efforts for parsing rdf efficiently, take advantage of it.

Good luck,
Olivier
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe go to http://protege.stanford.edu/community/subscribe.html

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe go to http://protege.stanford.edu/community/subscribe.html

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[protege-owl] Re: RE : Re: RE : Re: rdf:about vs. rdf:ID , what is the difference ?

Dan Brickley-2
In reply to this post by Olivier Dameron
* Olivier Dameron <[hidden email]> [2006-06-15 18:18+0200]

> On Thu, 15 Jun 2006 09:24:38 +0200, POPESCU Adrian 211643 Th?sard
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > I think it is possible to parse
> > the file in order to get information from it. I don't know if there
> > is a best way to do it, but here is one proposition:
> > -to get all
> > defined classes, you can search for the string: owl:Class rdf:ID
> > -to
> > get all object properties, you can search for owl:ObjectProperty
> > rdf:ID.
> > For the other property types it goes the same. -it is a bit
> > more difficult to get relationships but, with proper querying, I
> > think this can be done.
>
> This is definitely *not* the way to go.
> It would also be perfectly fine to have the following code, which
> would make your parsing clumsy: <owl:Class rdf:nodeID="A">
>   ...
> </owl:Class>
> <owl:Class rdf:nodeID="B">
>   ...
> </owl:Class>
> <owl:Class rdf:about="#A">
>   <rdf:subClassOf rdf:resource="#B"/>
> </owl:Class>
>
> I strongly encourage you to use an API. Others have spent considerable
> efforts for parsing rdf efficiently, take advantage of it.

Yup. Nobody should be relying on rdf:ID at the XML level. It is a
recipe for bugs and confusion, especially if the files are to be used by other
tools.

Dan
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe go to http://protege.stanford.edu/community/subscribe.html