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:
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> ;
.
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 ofhttp://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: