[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: [OASIS Issue Tracker] (OSLCCORE-24) Is there a reason OSLC domain vocabulary properties are not owl object properties?
[ https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/OSLCCORE-24?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=60353#comment-60353 ]
James Amsden commented on OSLCCORE-24:
--------------------------------------
I tend to agree that if RDFS is enough, then use it. Unfortunately Protege 5 doesn't seem to play well with RDFS anymore - it expects OWL. I'll try to get a copy of TopBraid Composer.
Regarding inferencing: yes OWL and RDFS inferencing can be confusing as sometimes the inferred triples don't correspond to our traditional structural view of data, especially regarding inferencing around class inheritance and properties based on their domains and ranges. However, OSLC vocabularies could explicitly assert what they need, and not rely on inferencing to include triples that clients and servers might need. This eliminates the need for inferencing and its performance implications.
However, these stated assertions should not result in inferred assertions that are unintentional or incorrect in the context of the domain if an inferencer is turned on in some server. This would require some additional development and testing for vocabularies.
Closing this issue as resolved, and taking no action on adding additional OWL data and object property assertions in the OSLC vocabularies.
> Is there a reason OSLC domain vocabulary properties are not owl object properties?
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: OSLCCORE-24
> URL: https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/OSLCCORE-24
> Project: OASIS OSLC Lifecycle Integration Core (OSLC Core) TC
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: James Amsden
> Assignee: James Amsden
>
> I ask because the OSLC Core 3.0 common vocabulary Turtle files can be loaded into Protege 5, but the properties do not show up because they are RDFS properties not OWL. Is there a reason OSLC uses declares the vocabularies are OWL ontologies but doesn't use OWL in the conventional way? Could this be changed without impacting existing implementations by simply adding the rdf:type?
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2.2#6258)
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]