Deactivation and graph imports

[cbur...@healthwise.org]

I have an EDG Ontology and two Taxonomies. They import one another as shown here:

Suppose I have defined an OWL object property and a corresponding SHACL property shape in the ontology, and I wish for the property to be either deactivated or hidden in Taxonomy 1, but not in Taxonomy 2. Is this possible?

I thought I would be able to do this by adding either a sh:deactivated or dash:hidden triple to the property shape's definition in Taxonomy 1, but there are two problems with this approach:

1. The EDG user interface does not seem to let me add this statement to the property shape in Taxonomy 1, even through the Source Code editor. Perhaps there is a setting that would allow me to make such additions to externally defined property shapes?

2. Even if I could manage to do it, my import structure means that the hidden or deactivated property would also be imported into Taxonomy 2, which I do not want.

Upon further reflection, it seems like a better approach would be to define this property in Taxonomy 2 only and omit it from my ontology entirely. Is this possible in the EDG UI? I can't seem to find a way to do it.

Or maybe there is another method you'd suggest?

thanks,

Carl Burnett

Ontology Engineer  |  Healthwise

[Irene Polikoff]

On Feb 2, 2021, at 2:30 PM, cbur...@healthwise.org <cbur...@healthwise.org> wrote:

I have an EDG Ontology and two Taxonomies. They import one another as shown here:

<import setup.jpg>

Suppose I have defined an OWL object property and a corresponding SHACL property shape in the ontology, and I wish for the property to be either deactivated or hidden in Taxonomy 1, but not in Taxonomy 2. Is this possible?

No, because of how your imports are structured. Any ontological definitions available in Taxonomy 1 would be available in Taxonomy 2. You can, however, deactivate or hide something in  Taxonomy 2 without hiding it in 1.

I thought I would be able to do this by adding either a sh:deactivated or dash:hidden triple to the property shape's definition in Taxonomy 1, but there are two problems with this approach:

1. The EDG user interface does not seem to let me add this statement to the property shape in Taxonomy 1, even through the Source Code editor. Perhaps there is a setting that would allow me to make such additions to externally defined property shapes?

This needs to be stated in an ontology

2. Even if I could manage to do it, my import structure means that the hidden or deactivated property would also be imported into Taxonomy 2, which I do not want.

Correct

Upon further reflection, it seems like a better approach would be to define this property in Taxonomy 2 only and omit it from my ontology entirely. Is this possible in the EDG UI? I can't seem to find a way to do it.

No, a taxonomy can only contain data, not property definitions. 

Or maybe there is another method you'd suggest?

You can create Ontology 2, import Ontology 1 into it and add new properties intended only for Taxonomy 2 into it. Then, your import structure would be as follows:

Ontology 2 imports Ontology 1

Taxonomy 1 imports Ontology 1

Taxonomy 2 imports Taxonomy 1 and Ontology 2.

Another option that may or may not be viable depending on your data is to define a class for concepts in Taxonomy 2 that is different from the class that concepts in Taxonomy 1 belong to. 

For example, let’s say that Taxonomy 2 is a taxonomy of Treatments while Taxonomy 1 is a taxonomy of Symptoms. Treatment and Symptom are both subclasses of skos:Concept. They have different properties - as needed. They can be both defined in Ontology 1. When you create treatments you use properties appropriate to treatments. When you create symptoms you use properties appropriate to symptoms.

thanks,

Carl Burnett

Ontology Engineer  |  Healthwise

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TopBraid Suite Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to topbraid-user...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/topbraid-users/09dcaabf-3b29-4d0f-b7dc-e6b9a72dcc4cn%40googlegroups.com.
<import setup.jpg>

[cbur...@healthwise.org]

Irene, thanks for your response. I had hoped to be able to avoid creating an "Ontology 2," but it seems like that's what I'll have to do.

Carl