PMC and community - your thoughts.
It would be good to have OWL2 support.
At the same time, it needs enough developer interest to make it sustainable.
So an important question is whether, from the wider Jena community,
there are people sufficiently interested to take this forward.
What's the relationship with
https://github.com/owlcs/ont-api
and
https://github.com/owlcs/owlapi
?
From the code history, it looks some of the code at least is
"Copyright (c), The University of Manchester, owl.cs group."
after which the provenance is unclear.
Andy
On 18/10/2019 11:29, ss zuev wrote:
Hello, everyone.
This is the question.
There is a project [ONT-API](https://github.com/avicomp/ont-api), which is
a jena-based OWL-API implementation.
It includes Ontology RDF Model,
[ru.avicomp.ontapi.jena.model.OntGraphModel](
https://github.com/avicomp/ont-api/blob/master/src/main/java/ru/avicomp/ontapi/jena/model/OntGraphModel.java),
that is an analogue of org.apache.jena.ontology.OntModel but for OWL2
semantic.
Currently I can't continue with domain avicomp, and, therefore,I'd like to
move somewhere the whole project or some its part.
I think the OntGraphModel as a feature could be very convenient for Jena
users.
Few additional notes:
ONT-API has direct tests for only this model (package
ru.avicomp.ontapi.tests.jena),
and total number of testcases (which might be considered as indirect tests)
is about 5500 (many of them were taken from OWL-API).
It also has benchmarks and memmarks (but not for `OntGraphModel`).
Also it has javadocs and usages: (my) ONT-D2RQ, ONT-MAP projects, and
protege-like system (yet not in github), many other users also use ONT-API
somehow.
Obviously, the possible moving would mean total refactoring : changing
namespaces and class names, fix docs, maybe moving methods, etc.
What do you think about this?
