Hi Holger, Thanks for explanation and your cool tutorial Ontology Mapping with SPIN Templates on TopBraid Blog.
Regards Łukasz On 19 Sie, 23:32, Holger Knublauch <[email protected]> wrote: > Sorry, I don't have this file any more. Most triples are visible > though, so it's easy to create a similar example hands-on. The > mechanism of storing such CONSTRUCT queries has changed since I wrote > the blog entry (3 years ago!) - we now use the property spin:query to > store such mappings (was: sparql:query). In many cases, using SPIN's > rule mechanism is a better option now, because you can more clearly > attach mapping rules to the classes that they are talking about, using > spin:rule. > > Holger > > On Aug 19, 2009, at 12:17 PM, ol3j wrote: > > > > > > > Hi, > > > Thx for comment. > > > Holger, could you send me example files from > >http://composing-the-semantic-web.blogspot.com/2006/09/ontology-mappi... > > . > > You wrote in comments that it is possible. If it isnt problem and you > > still have the files. GUI for alignmentontologywill be very helpful > > tool in Composer. > > > ol3j > > > On 12 Sie, 18:40, Holger Knublauch <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi ol3j, > > >> TopBraid currently does not have an interactive graphical mapping > >> editor like the one on your first screenshot. This is one of the > >> things I always planned to do but never really had time to finish. As > >> described in my blog, the diagram view can visualize SPARQL-based > >> mappings (using spin:query) in class diagrams, but there is no way to > >> define new mappings this way. > > >> SPIN has various mechanisms though to make the definition of such > >> mappings as easy as possible though. In particular you can define a > >> library of SPIN templates for typical patterns. Then you would just > >> need to instantiate those templates (which can actually be done > >> nicely > >> with the Graph view of TBC). > > >> Holger > > >> On Aug 12, 2009, at 1:11 AM, ol3j wrote: > > >>> So, I can merge two files with differentontologyby use import tab > >>> and export/merge OWL/RDF files. I would like to know that is any > >>> possibility alignmentontologyin TopBraid using GUI for example > >>> (http://webhome.cs.uvic.ca/~seanf/images/cogz_screenshot.png). I > >>> know > >>> that I can use SPARQL for example > >>>http://composing-the-semantic-web.blogspot.com/2006/09/ontology-mappi > >>> ... > >>> you fix images, I don't see). > > >>> Thanks > >>> ol3j > > >>> On 6 Lip, 18:30, Dean Allemang <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>> Obrst, Leo J. wrote: > >>>>> Perhaps then you already have the capabilities that e-connections > >>>>> or comparable notions are intended to provide? Basically it is > >>>>> both a way to logically partition a givenontologyinto sub- > >>>>> domains and also a way to have mappings among ontologies which are > >>>>> much finer-grained than imports, and not just reduced to ordinary > >>>>> OWL equivalence assertions (sameAs, etc.) > > >>>>> There are a couple of such notions floating around: e-connections, > >>>>> Distributed Description Logic (DDL), etc. For example, [1]. > > >>>>> Thanks, > >>>>> Leo > > >>>> In principle, owl:imports can be as fine-grained as you like; you > >>>> could > >>>> have a bunch of named graphs with a single triple apiece. That's > >>>> in > >>>> principle, but in practice it doesn't deviate that much. If you > >>>> have a > >>>> tool that make managing multiple named graphs / OWL files easy, you > >>>> can > >>>> split yourontologyinto a large number of pieces, and manage them > >>>> with > >>>> owl:imports. We have been doing this successfully for year. > >>>> Back the > >>>> the Protege days, managing a dozen such modules was an onus. We > >>>> typically manage several dozen nowadays, and occasionally in the > >>>> hundreds, without undue stress on project management. > > >>>> Furthermore, within SPARLQMotion, you can define (with a SPARQL > >>>> CONSTRUCT) just what part of anontologyyou are really interested > >>>> in, > >>>> and pass that on to the next SM module. This has the advantage of > >>>> keeping within standards as closely as possible (eg, SPARQL doing > >>>> all > >>>> the heavy lifting for defining sets of triples), while providing > >>>> capabilities of the sort you are describing. > > >>>> But of course, Holger's comment about extra plugins is the real > >>>> answer - > >>>> even if I am correct that with SM and our multipleontology > >>>> management > >>>> infrastructure, we can support many of the same requirements, you > >>>> might > >>>> still want to support e-connections etc. > > >>>> Dean --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TopBraid Composer Users" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/topbraid-composer-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
