Skip to Content.

swikig - Re: [swikig] [Semediawiki-user] Semantics of MW Categories and OWL

swikig AT

Subject: Semantic Wiki Interest Group

Text archives

Re: [swikig] [Semediawiki-user] Semantics of MW Categories and OWL

Chronological Thread 
  • From: "Yaron Koren" <yaron57 AT>
  • To: "Uschold, Michael F" <michael.f.uschold AT>
  • Cc: "Clark, Peter E" <clarkp AT>, "Jones, David H" <david.h.jones AT>, semediawiki-user AT, "Kitzmiller, Ted" <ted.kitzmiller AT>, mediawiki-l AT, "Folger, Deborah H" <deborah.h.folger AT>, "Murray, William R" <William.R.Murray AT>, swikig AT
  • Subject: Re: [swikig] [Semediawiki-user] Semantics of MW Categories and OWL
  • Date: Sat, 4 Aug 2007 09:40:08 -0400
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=hzRNg9MC/g+3XD9ZHjCItkZFPF6XhpfuMx9vY6dQOSIFTRSUtDSUSGahEIYwgyN0Vg8dmk3QA4EdHNdoFuM7NOKwAuzNcu/+ehmCbavghvq/lJu3TltNyvsVvnM1YpO6PqfHqbDoR/6jABzcVoTPAsKHhlNp49udZwFYZtYRv5U=
  • Envelope-to: swikig AT
  • List-archive: <>
  • List-id: Semantic Wiki Interest Group <>

Hi Michael,

In answer to your specific questions about categories, you should check out this thread from a month ago: AT . Long story short, though categories are used for many things in MediaWiki, in Semantic MediaWiki they should really only be used to indicate instances and subclasses (and the way to differentiate between those two is that one is itself a category and the other is not).

Also, you can avoid having a template itself be part of a category through use of the "<includeonly>" tag.


On 8/4/07, Danny Ayers <danny.ayers AT> wrote:
On 04/08/07, Uschold, Michael F <michael.f.uschold AT> wrote:
> The semantics of categories in Media Wiki seems to be too general, so that
> it is not amenable to linking up with OWL.

With OWL DL, I believe you're right. But this doesn't rule out using
parts of OWL (e.g. <categoryA> owl:sameAs <categoryB>) under OWL Full.

It may be possible to apply the usual trick of indirection to get
around the problem you describe. I've not looked closely, but
categories could perhaps be wrapped into SKOS [1] concepts, so the
reasoning would be over properties like broader/narrower, without the
potential inconsistencies brought on through using subclass
relationships directly. (Not unrelated is the Tag Ontology [2] which
uses SKOS to cover folksonomy tagging).

I don't believe it's going to solve the kind of problem you describe
overnight (especially since there appear to be other aspects that are
further from RDF/RDFS) but there may be hope on the horizon with OWL
In OWL 1.1 a name (such as Person) can be used as any or all of an
individual, a class, or a property. The computational problems that
would arise if this were treated as in RDF are avoided by ensuring
that no aspect of the use of the name as an individual has any effect
on the meaning of the name as a class. Such a treatment of
metamodeling is often called punning.




This email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >>
Semediawiki-user mailing list
Semediawiki-user AT

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.16.

Top of Page