My team is working in the changes to work with Postgres.... In this week
we have a version but we are begining a test....
This changes may be dirty.... but I expect that works fine ....
With the constraints.... I think SMW as a repository of an ontology...
really a repository of an ontology extension (Abox). Obviously, the
repository must consider the ontology intension (Tbox).
In SMW, I think, the Tbox is built with the relations, attributes, and
categories.... and I think that works fine.
All of this must be modeled with RDF...may be modeled with OWL but only
if is translated in RDF...
I think, someone can correct me if i'm wrong, that SMW is a good (or
might be a good) environment to develope ontologies in a collaboration
In order that SMW supports OWL 1.0 really, must be support class
definitions using restrictions like all values, some values, at least,
at most, etc.
Also must be support subrole.
If the support OWL 1.1, also must be added support for Self, regular
role chaining, etc.
I'm not an expert in MW. I'm have adapted some special pages and write
one or two..... so I could be in the wrong way.... sorry.
I don't think how to do this in details, but:
1. Class definition might be added as new tags via specialpages, to be
used in category pages.
2. Subrole, might be added as new tags via specialpages to be used in
3. Constraint control might generate warnings or errors or nothing on
the save operation of a page which produce a violation.
I expect corrections, ideas, etc. (also, if any needs send to me,
insults by the ideas :-) )
PD: Excuses by my english !!!! It's very poor !!!! Sorry.
S Page wrote:
> Fernando Carpani - INCO wrote:
>> Hello. I'm newbie in the list.
>> There are some Postgresql version? The current published version
>> works only with mysql, but we need work on Postgresql...
> Not that I'm aware of.
> The thread "Re: [Semediawiki-user] database install problem"
> discusses a particular Postgres problem and possible workarounds.
> Nobody has provided code to support Postgres.
>> I've been worked with 0.6... such version works with RDF, and can
>> read OWL files (beacause there are RDF...)
> If you're referring to Special:Import ontology, it is disabled in
> 0.7. http://ontoworld.org/wiki/Help:Ontology_import mentions this and
> describes alternative RDF import scripts written in Python.
>> what happend with the OWL constraints (some values, etc) in the
>> current version?
> I'm not sure what you mean. SMW doesn't really apply or impose OWL or
> RDFS constraints. It merely stores semantic properties of articles
> for display, query, and export. Its own datatypes impose some
> restrictions, e.g. Type:Enumeration limits possible values. And you
> can "import a vocabulary", see
> http://ontoworld.org/wiki/Help:Import_vocabulary , so that when SMW
> properties are exported as RDF, they will use the external
> vocabulary. For example, http://ontoworld.org/wiki/Attribute:Name is
> exported in RDF as <foaf:name>.
>> There are some development or plan to explote it?
> Can you be more specific what you want?
> =S Page