UNDER CONSTRUCTION -- Use `versionIRI` as a concept prefix

[plbt5]

Background

A new issue needs to be worked through w.r.t. the proposed strategy of using the versionIRI as a concept prefix.

If a concept is defined with the versionIRI as part of its IRI, there is nothing in OWL that induces the existence of the unversioned IRI form. E.g. http://example.org/ontology/0.1.0/File does not imply the existence of http://example.org/ontology/File.

Ultimately, the effect of this is that if a knowledge base intends to pin a version of CASE to be used, this is not easily possible.

Requirements

Requirement 1

Allow to pin a particular version of CASE in a knowledge base by applying its versionIRI.

Requirement 2

Allow to pin the most recent version of CASE in a knowledge base by default

Risk / Benefit analysis

Benefits

CASE allows adopters of the standard to refer to either a particular version of CASE, or to apply the default most recent version of CASE.

Risks

The submitter is unaware of risks associated with this change

Competencies demonstrated

Competency 1

Competency Question 1.1

Result 1.1

Competency Question 1.2

Result 1.2

Solution suggestion

Define within the knowledge base an all-encompassing owl:Ontology, and have it import the versionIRI of CASE. Management issues around detection of multiple conflicting versionIRIs for a single ontology can then be handled with a SHACL rule within this proposal on Github:

UCO should perform OWL 2 DL review with SHACL-SPARQL (Change Proposal #406)

So, if our frequently-exercised knowledge base IRI for example individuals, http://example.org/kb/, were to involve pinning a used version of CASE, the correct answer would be to include this in the graph pertaining to that prefix:

<http://example.org/kb>
    a owl:Ontology ;
    owl:imports <https://ontology.caseontology.org/case/case/0.9.0> ;
    .

[plbt5]

@ajnelson-nist I think that this issue has been resolved with #113 and can therefore be removed?

[ajnelson-nist]

Correct, this is resolved.