javaowl-devel

[Javaowl-devel] OWL Abstract Syntax

[Gerardo H. <ma...@pr...>]

I believe it might be a good idea to support the OWL Abstract Syntax
( http://www.w3c.org/TR/owl-absyn/syntax.html ), as it is easier to type
and read than N3.

Unfortunately, Jena does not have an abstract syntax parser :(

So we probably should write our own parser. My own preference is to use
JavaCC because I already know how to use it, but the Antlr is already a
part of Jena (and it is in our CVS!) so it might be better to just use
Antlr.

Here is the Antlr home page: http://www.antlr.org/

It seems to be pretty good. And the documentation is much better than JavaCC's...

What are your thoughts on this?

-- 


Gerardo Horvilleur
ma...@mu...

Re: [Javaowl-devel] OWL Abstract Syntax

[Gerardo H. <ma...@pr...>]

The OWL API at sourceforge ( http://sourceforge.net/projects/owlapi ) has an
Antrl based OWL Abstract Syntax parser.

Here are the files for the antlr parser and lexer:

http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/owlapi/owl/abstractparser/grammar/abstract-owl.g?rev=1.4&view=auto
http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/owlapi/owl/abstractparser/grammar/lexer.g?rev=1.3&view=auto

It shouldn't be too hard to adapt these to use the Jena API...


Gerardo Horvilleur wrote:
> I believe it might be a good idea to support the OWL Abstract Syntax
> ( http://www.w3c.org/TR/owl-absyn/syntax.html ), as it is easier to type
> and read than N3.
> 
> Unfortunately, Jena does not have an abstract syntax parser :(
> 
> So we probably should write our own parser. My own preference is to use
> JavaCC because I already know how to use it, but the Antlr is already a
> part of Jena (and it is in our CVS!) so it might be better to just use
> Antlr.
> 
> Here is the Antlr home page: http://www.antlr.org/
> 
> It seems to be pretty good. And the documentation is much better than 
> JavaCC's...
> 
> What are your thoughts on this?
> 

-- 


Gerardo Horvilleur
ma...@mu...