Hi Everyone,
I've been trying to use qudt and vaem ontologies and have lots of troubles
with them. I know that qudt version 2 will be released soon, so I wonder if
all these issues are going to be fixed:
Wrong definitions for custom datatypes. For example in vaem ontology there
is custom datatype vaem:numericUnion:
vaem:numericUnion
rdf:type rdfs:Datatype ;
rdfs:label "numeric union"^^xsd:string ;
rdfs:subClassOf rdfs:Resource ;
vaem:description "A datatype that is the union of numeric xsd data
types. LMC's 'numericUnion' is equivalent to the xsd specification that
uses an xsd:union of memberTypes='xsd:decimal xsd:double xsd:float
xsd:integer'."^^xsd:string ;
owl:unionOf (xsd:float xsd:decimal xsd:integer xsd:double) .
It is wrong custom datatype definition, instead it should be:
vaem:numericUnion
rdfs:label "numeric union"^^xsd:string ;
vaem:description "A datatype that is the union of numeric xsd data
types. LMC's 'numericUnion' is equivalent to the xsd specification that
uses an xsd:union of memberTypes='xsd:decimal xsd:double xsd:float
xsd:integer'."^^xsd:string ;
owl:equivalentClass [
rdf:type rdfs:Datatype;
owl:unionOf (xsd:float xsd:decimal xsd:integer xsd:double) .
] .
Or lets look into qudt:
qudt:string1024
rdf:type rdfs:Datatype ;
rdfs:label "string1024"^^xsd:string ;
rdfs:subClassOf xsd:string ;
owl:equivalentClass
[ rdf:type rdfs:Datatype ;
owl:onDatatype xsd:string ;
owl:withRestrictions
([ xsd:maxLength "1024"^^xsd:nonNegativeInteger
])
] .
>From protege mailing list (
http://protege-ontology-editor-knowledge-acquisition-system.136.n4.nabble.com/Property-classified-as-DatatypeProperty-and-ObjectProperty-at-the-same-time-Bug-td4658771.html
):
"
If you have
X rdfs:subClassOf Y
then X and Y must be class expressions (i.e. not data ranges - so the
statement isn't valid OWL).
"
One more things that I've noticed is violation of your own constraints. For
example there is property:
qudt:description
rdf:type owl:DatatypeProperty ;
rdfs:label "description"^^xsd:string ;
rdfs:range qudt:string1024 ;
rdfs:subPropertyOf vaem:description .
But almost everywhere you violate your own constraint, and use literal
which is much bigger than 1024 characters.
I hope you will take all of the above into consideration for version 2. And
to be honest, I was very surprised that these bugs haven't been fixed (or
even noticed) in version 1.1.
Thanks, Artem.
--
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Group "TopBraid Suite Users", the topics of which include Enterprise Vocabulary
Network (EVN), TopBraid Composer, TopBraid Live, TopBraid Insight,
SPARQLMotion, SPARQL Web Pages and SPIN.
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-users?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"TopBraid Suite Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
