Is there a reason OSLC domain vocabulary properties are not owl object properties?

XMLWordPrintable

    • Type: Bug
    • Resolution: Won't Fix
    • Priority: Major
    • Component/s: None
    • None
    • Hide

      There is little reason to include additional OWL assertions to the OSLC vocabularies just to make them more complete OWL ontologies and work well in Protege 5. I can use a different tool that supports RDFS directly.

      Show
      There is little reason to include additional OWL assertions to the OSLC vocabularies just to make them more complete OWL ontologies and work well in Protege 5. I can use a different tool that supports RDFS directly.

      I ask because the OSLC Core 3.0 common vocabulary Turtle files can be loaded into Protege 5, but the properties do not show up because they are RDFS properties not OWL. Is there a reason OSLC uses declares the vocabularies are OWL ontologies but doesn't use OWL in the conventional way? Could this be changed without impacting existing implementations by simply adding the rdf:type?

            Assignee:
            James Amsden (Inactive)
            Reporter:
            James Amsden (Inactive)
            Votes:
            0 Vote for this issue
            Watchers:
            2 Start watching this issue

              Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved: