Page 1 of 1
MultidimensionalObject in OWL
Posted: Sun Oct 07, 2012 11:25 pm
by vvagr
Is it true that we don't have in Part 8 standard representation of an instance of MultidimensionalObject (or its subtypes) in RDF/OWL? We can build a representation of LIST analogous to template description, but we have to standardize it separately.
Is it worth to do it, or we just need a set of templates for 2,3,4,... dimensional objects without any need ever to expand them to Part 2 level?
Re: MultidimensionalObject in OWL
Posted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 1:12 pm
by HansTeijgeler
MultidimensionalObject and ClassOfMultidimensionalObject cause problems in OWL, because OWL has problems with handling lists (see for example
http://www.co-ode.org/resources/tutoria ... _11_05.ppt).
That is the reason why in Part 8 there is no mapping to OWL of MultidimensionalObject or ClassOfMultidimensionalObject. Instead we have that template model (see
http://www.infowebml.ws/descr/templates ... plates.htm)
In the template definitions I have done what you suggested, i.e. created various subtypes of ClassOfMultidimensionalObject with role1, role2, etc and MultidimensionalObject with element1, element2, etc.
Anybody who knows a better solution is welcome to contribute this.
Re: MultidimensionalObject in OWL
Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2013 1:43 pm
by vvagr
Oh my god! CoMO do exist in RDL and are represented in OWL. All initial set templates are in RDL. With OWLList used for roles.
Start at
http://rds.posccaesar.org/2008/06/OWL/RDL#RDS1001939191
Re: MultidimensionalObject in OWL
Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2013 8:34 am
by vvagr
Hans,
I've a question about
http://www.infowebml.ws/descr/templates ... plates.htm
I feel there are really no such things as p7tm:Template or p7tm:BaseTemplate. They are exactly the same things as p7tm:TemplateStatement and p7tm:BaseTemlateStatement. Their introduction as separate level in classification chain really breaks Part 2 typing.
Re: MultidimensionalObject in OWL
Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2013 1:34 pm
by HansTeijgeler
Hi Victor,
That stuff has been replaced with a new proposal that can be found at
http://www.15926.org/publications/templ ... /index.htm
Please look at it and decide whether your question still holds.
Regards,
Hans