search

ease-crc / soma

The Socio-physical Model of Activities (SOMA) is a formal activity model for embodied agents that need to operate their body to generate motions that cause intentional effects in the physical and social world.
GNU Lesser General Public License v3.0
16 stars 22 forks source link

Switch to Manchester Syntax #248

Open mrnolte opened 2 years ago

mrnolte commented 2 years ago

For reviews, it would be nice to have the ontologies and the changes in Manchester Syntax, which is designed to be human-readable. It is also the Ontology Language used by Protégé, e.g., to define complex concepts. It might be neccessary to convert the Manchester Syntax to XML for online releases (via the CI).

sasjonge commented 2 years ago

In issue https://github.com/ease-crc/soma/issues/251we have problems with some GCI's. It looks to me, as if GCI's are deleted in the manchester syntax, so this could be a problem in this issue, too.

mrnolte commented 2 years ago

Uli Sattler writes that GCI's are not proper manchester syntax - I will look into that into more detail next week

mrnolte commented 2 years ago

image Protégé tells me the same - either we resolve the GCIs, which seem to cause problems elswehere, too (#251 ) or maybe use functional syntax / turtle syntax instead? Still way easier to read than XML

mpomarlan commented 2 years ago

+1 for functional syntax :)

mrnolte commented 2 years ago

This is not closed yet! The .owl files are not in another format yet, as we need to wait for all .owl-file regarding pull requests to be completed. Otherwise, it will be a huge pain to merge these PRs.

mrnolte commented 1 year ago

We could still use Manchester Syntax instead of Functional, if we rewrite the GCIs - and this seems to be possible without leaving EL: for C_1 subclass C_2, where C_1 and C_2 are complex concepts, one would introduce new Concepts A_1 and A_2 and assert C_1 = A_1, A_1 subclass A_2, A_2 = C_2, which gets rid of the CI. I would prefer this.

daniel86 commented 1 year ago

someone also needs to make sure KnowRob can load the ontologies in the other format! might not be a lot of work, but code must be modified I am pretty sure

mrnolte commented 1 year ago

someone also needs to make sure KnowRob can load the ontologies in the other format! might not be a lot of work, but code must be modified I am pretty sure

This has been thought through already: We only want to switch the syntax in the git files (for readability in the git changelog / PRs), the CI will then translate them back to rdf xml. This has already been implemented here: #264

Therefore, the published files (via the URIs) will still be in rdf xml.