Accepting this isnt the right forum, there are some interesting and important architectural issues here - so what is the right forum (where TQ architects can be engaged to either explain best practices or consider roadmap)
I'll take the opportunity to point to some W3C work I've been involved with, which is aimed at enabling Linked Data environments to expose the same objects using different data models (aka "profiles") - https://w3c.github.io/dxwg/connegp/ in my view the issue of transformability to useful forms and reasoning envelopes needs to be separated from graph closure with owl imports - use owl:imports only for the profile of OWL you wish to support - and explore virtualisation of graphs via transformations for other purposes. for example - using a SKOS visualisation (or a EDG lineagegram for that matter) is perfectly sensible for a SKOS view of an rdfs: class hierarchy (skos:Concepts are conceptually broader then RDFS or OWL Classes) TBC already has all the tools - SHACL transforms, and SparqlMotion which has a virtual graph reflecting execution state, and ui:spin tempGraphs etc - AFAICT it just lacks a means to surface virtual graphs and metadata about them. RA On Wednesday, 9 October 2019 02:31:08 UTC+11, Bohms, H.M. (Michel) wrote: > > > > In: > > https://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/SKOS/skos-and-owl/master.html > > > > its is said: > > “ > > To illustrate these patterns, let's start with the following semi-formal > conceptualisation: > > ex:mountains rdf:type skos:Concept; > > skos:prefLabel "Mountains"@en. > > > > ex:himalayas rdf:type skos:Concept; > > skos:prefLabel "Himalayas"@en; > > skos:broader ex:mountains. > > > > ex:everest rdf:type skos:Concept; > > skos:prefLabel "Everest"@en; > > skos:broader ex:himalayas. > > *Overlay SKOS with OWL* > > In this pattern, we use OWL to overlay additional semantics on the same > vocabulary, e.g. by adding the following triples: > > ex:mountains rdf:type owl:Class. > > > > ex:himalayas rdf:type owl:Class; > > rdfs:subClassOf ex:mountains. > > > > ex:everest rdf:type ex:himalayas. > > If the two sets of triples are merged, then this pattern necessarily > leads to an OWL Full representation, because an instance of skos:Concept > might also be an instance of owl:Class. > > > > “ > > > > Is the red statement really true? And if yes, is it really an issue here? > > > > (maybe it was under owl1 but under owl2 not different?) > > > > thx for advice, Michel > > > > > > > > > > Dr. ir. H.M. (Michel) Böhms > Senior Data Scientist > > T +31888663107 > M +31630381220 > E [email protected] <javascript:> > > Location > <https://www.google.com/maps/place/TNO+-+Locatie+Delft+-+Stieltjesweg/@52.000788,4.3745183,17z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0x47c5b58c52869997:0x56681566be3b8c88!8m2!3d52.000788!4d4.376707> > > > > <http://www.tno.nl/> > > This message may contain information that is not intended for you. If you > are not the addressee or if this message was sent to you by mistake, you > are requested to inform the sender and delete the message. TNO accepts no > liability for the content of this e-mail, for the manner in which you use > it and for damage of any kind resulting from the risks inherent to the > electronic transmission of messages. > > > > > > > > > -- 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]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/topbraid-users/5d98489d-89dc-47f8-9c37-c072774a4d5d%40googlegroups.com.
