"Fold" option for properties in Protege

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

"Fold" option for properties in Protege

Laura Morales
I have a property that accepts long texts (markdown documents). In Protege, in my "Property assertion" view, this text takes a lot of space and it's a bit annoying because it makes browsing other properties kind of difficult. I was wondering if there is any way to "fold" this text, that is to show only a max number of characters at most.
It's a minor issue of course, but I'm sending this message hoping to offer some constructive feedback.
_______________________________________________
protege-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "Fold" option for properties in Protege

Csongor Nyulas
Administrator
Interesting suggestion. I wonder if it wouldn't make sense to make these
properties annotation properties, and show these long property values in
the "Annotations" view.
One advantage would be that the annotation view is much wider (in the
default configuration), and as such the long text would not take up so
much vertical space. Second, it is hardly likely that a property value
containing such a long text, is part of the logical definition of the
class or individual, so it should not be included there. People
interested primarily in the logical axioms can safely ignore it. Those
who are interested in the non-logical axioms (as well), can scroll up
and down in the annotations view.

Just a thought.
Csongor


On 5/23/19 9:49 AM, Laura Morales wrote:
> I have a property that accepts long texts (markdown documents). In Protege, in my "Property assertion" view, this text takes a lot of space and it's a bit annoying because it makes browsing other properties kind of difficult. I was wondering if there is any way to "fold" this text, that is to show only a max number of characters at most.
> It's a minor issue of course, but I'm sending this message hoping to offer some constructive feedback.
> _______________________________________________
> protege-user mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-user


_______________________________________________
protege-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "Fold" option for properties in Protege

Laura Morales
Thanks for the suggestion. I've tried it and yes, this is useful to separate it from the other properties, although the annotations view has the same problem in case there are multiple annotations.
However, I'm struggling to understand when I should use a new "property" or a new "annotation". My understanding of annotations is that they were there only to annotate existing properties, for example by adding a developer's comment on a particular property. Not as way to store actual data. For example I could have the property "content: ...my markdown..." and then an annotation like "TODO: check spelling" or something like this.
 
 

Sent: Friday, May 24, 2019 at 2:21 AM
From: "Csongor Nyulas" <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [protege-user] "Fold" option for properties in Protege
Interesting suggestion. I wonder if it wouldn't make sense to make these
properties annotation properties, and show these long property values in
the "Annotations" view.
One advantage would be that the annotation view is much wider (in the
default configuration), and as such the long text would not take up so
much vertical space. Second, it is hardly likely that a property value
containing such a long text, is part of the logical definition of the
class or individual, so it should not be included there. People
interested primarily in the logical axioms can safely ignore it. Those
who are interested in the non-logical axioms (as well), can scroll up
and down in the annotations view.

Just a thought.
Csongor
_______________________________________________
protege-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "Fold" option for properties in Protege

Lorenz B.


Thanks for the suggestion. I've tried it and yes, this is useful to separate it from the other properties, although the annotations view has the same problem in case there are multiple annotations.
However, I'm struggling to understand when I should use a new "property" or a new "annotation". My understanding of annotations is that they were there only to annotate existing properties, for example by adding a developer's comment on a particular property. Not as way to store actual data. For example I could have the property "content: ...my markdown..." and then an annotation like "TODO: check spelling" or something like this.
 

No, that's not correct. You can annotate basically anything in an OWL document.

Annotation properties can be used to provide an annotation for an ontology, axiom, or an IRI.
The probably most prominent and know annotation property is rdfs:label which is built-in in OWL - and this one is used to annotate  any entity in OWL that has a IRI, i.e. named classes, named individuals, properties.

The decision between data property and annotation property depends on whether it is used for logical or nonlogical information. Annotation properties do not provide any semantics in OWL, thus, there are also not considered by any standard OWL reasoning algorithm.

 

Sent: Friday, May 24, 2019 at 2:21 AM
From: "Csongor Nyulas" [hidden email]
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [protege-user] "Fold" option for properties in Protege
Interesting suggestion. I wonder if it wouldn't make sense to make these
properties annotation properties, and show these long property values in
the "Annotations" view.
One advantage would be that the annotation view is much wider (in the
default configuration), and as such the long text would not take up so
much vertical space. Second, it is hardly likely that a property value
containing such a long text, is part of the logical definition of the
class or individual, so it should not be included there. People
interested primarily in the logical axioms can safely ignore it. Those
who are interested in the non-logical axioms (as well), can scroll up
and down in the annotations view.

Just a thought.
Csongor
_______________________________________________
protege-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-user


-- 
Lorenz Bühmann
AKSW group, University of Leipzig
Group: http://aksw.org - semantic web research center

_______________________________________________
protege-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Fw: Re: "Fold" option for properties in Protege

Laura Morales
In reply to this post by Laura Morales
I think I forgot to mention an important bit of information. In my particular case I'm talking about data properties of individuals. So, for instance, if I'm adding a "Review" individual, this will have a data property called "text: ...". Or if I'm making a graph representing a conversation, I would have a "Message" individual with a data property "content: ..."
 
 

Sent: Friday, May 24, 2019 at 8:29 AM
From: "Laura Morales" <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Cc: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [protege-user] "Fold" option for properties in Protege
Thanks for the suggestion. I've tried it and yes, this is useful to separate it from the other properties, although the annotations view has the same problem in case there are multiple annotations.
However, I'm struggling to understand when I should use a new "property" or a new "annotation". My understanding of annotations is that they were there only to annotate existing properties, for example by adding a developer's comment on a particular property. Not as way to store actual data. For example I could have the property "content: ...my markdown..." and then an annotation like "TODO: check spelling" or something like this.
 
 

Sent: Friday, May 24, 2019 at 2:21 AM
From: "Csongor Nyulas" <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [protege-user] "Fold" option for properties in Protege
Interesting suggestion. I wonder if it wouldn't make sense to make these
properties annotation properties, and show these long property values in
the "Annotations" view.
One advantage would be that the annotation view is much wider (in the
default configuration), and as such the long text would not take up so
much vertical space. Second, it is hardly likely that a property value
containing such a long text, is part of the logical definition of the
class or individual, so it should not be included there. People
interested primarily in the logical axioms can safely ignore it. Those
who are interested in the non-logical axioms (as well), can scroll up
and down in the annotations view.

Just a thought.
Csongor
_______________________________________________
protege-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "Fold" option for properties in Protege

Laura Morales
In reply to this post by Lorenz B.
OK but annotations are like documentation, or comments in source code, aren't they? So in my case using an annotation instead of a data property is more a hack than it is logically correct, isn't it? It makes me wonder why rdfs:label is an annotation rather than an actual data property of an IRI... What I mean is that if I have http://example.org#Alice I'd expect rdfs:label="Miss. Alice" to be a property of Alice rather than just an annotation.

 

Sent: Friday, May 24, 2019 at 8:45 AM
From: "Lorenz B." <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [protege-user] "Fold" option for properties in Protege

  
Thanks for the suggestion. I've tried it and yes, this is useful to separate it from the other properties, although the annotations view has the same problem in case there are multiple annotations.
However, I'm struggling to understand when I should use a new "property" or a new "annotation". My understanding of annotations is that they were there only to annotate existing properties, for example by adding a developer's comment on a particular property. Not as way to store actual data. For example I could have the property "content: ...my markdown..." and then an annotation like "TODO: check spelling" or something like this.
 
No, that's not correct. You can annotate basically anything in an OWL document.
 
Annotation properties can be used to provide an annotation for an ontology, axiom, or an IRI.The probably most prominent and know annotation property is rdfs:label which is built-in in OWL - and this one is used to annotate  any entity in OWL that has a IRI, i.e. named classes, named individuals, properties.
 
The decision between data property and annotation property depends on whether it is used for logical or nonlogical information. Annotation properties do not provide any semantics in OWL, thus, there are also not considered by any standard OWL reasoning algorithm.

_______________________________________________
protege-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "Fold" option for properties in Protege

Lorenz B.


OK but annotations are like documentation, or comments in source code, aren't they? 
more or less, yes. They do not contain semantic information w.r.t. the Semantic Web idea.
So in my case using an annotation instead of a data property is more a hack than it is logically correct, isn't it? It makes me wonder why rdfs:label is an annotation rather than an actual data property of an IRI... What I mean is that if I have http://example.org#Alice I'd expect rdfs:label="Miss. Alice" to be a property of Alice rather than just an annotation.

rdfs:label is just an annotation property because by definition its only purpose is to provide an IRI with a human-readable label. There is no semantics in it compared to lets say a property providing the name of a person or entity like e.g. foaf:name which is defined as owl:DatatypeProperty in the FOAF vocab.

From my point of view, your :review property should by a data property, especially when you start to create axioms like

:RatedBook SubClassOf :Book and min 1 :review

you won't have any choice. Indeed, for use-cases like querying via SPARQL it doesn't matter. For modeling, reasoning etc. it does


 

Sent: Friday, May 24, 2019 at 8:45 AM
From: "Lorenz B." [hidden email]
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [protege-user] "Fold" option for properties in Protege

  
Thanks for the suggestion. I've tried it and yes, this is useful to separate it from the other properties, although the annotations view has the same problem in case there are multiple annotations.
However, I'm struggling to understand when I should use a new "property" or a new "annotation". My understanding of annotations is that they were there only to annotate existing properties, for example by adding a developer's comment on a particular property. Not as way to store actual data. For example I could have the property "content: ...my markdown..." and then an annotation like "TODO: check spelling" or something like this.
 
No, that's not correct. You can annotate basically anything in an OWL document.
 
Annotation properties can be used to provide an annotation for an ontology, axiom, or an IRI.The probably most prominent and know annotation property is rdfs:label which is built-in in OWL - and this one is used to annotate  any entity in OWL that has a IRI, i.e. named classes, named individuals, properties.
 
The decision between data property and annotation property depends on whether it is used for logical or nonlogical information. Annotation properties do not provide any semantics in OWL, thus, there are also not considered by any standard OWL reasoning algorithm.

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


-- 
Lorenz Bühmann
AKSW group, University of Leipzig
Group: http://aksw.org - semantic web research center

_______________________________________________
protege-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "Fold" option for properties in Protege

Matthew Horridge-2
Administrator
In reply to this post by Laura Morales
Hi Laura,

This is a really useful suggestion.  I’ve filed an issue for it here

https://github.com/protegeproject/protege/issues/893

Cheers,

Matthew

> On May 23, 2019, at 09:49, Laura Morales <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> I have a property that accepts long texts (markdown documents). In Protege, in my "Property assertion" view, this text takes a lot of space and it's a bit annoying because it makes browsing other properties kind of difficult. I was wondering if there is any way to "fold" this text, that is to show only a max number of characters at most.
> It's a minor issue of course, but I'm sending this message hoping to offer some constructive feedback.
> _______________________________________________
> protege-user mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-user

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