latency with 'transitive' owl:imports - regarding import issue #4

[LisaDawn]

Hi,
I'm having an issue with imports.

That is:

Ontology A defines two classes

Ontology B defines instances of those classes
Ontology B owl:imports Ontology A.

Ontology C owl:imports Ontology B.
nothing newly defined (yet)

When I load A, then B and click on B, I do see the instances defined in B.
However, when I then load C, I see nothing.

I would expect, when I load C, to see the classes from A and the instances defined in B.

I tried again with C owl:imports B and C owl:imports A, but had the same problem.

I need to integrate multiple data sources from different ontologies.

Any ideas what could be causing this issue?

Here is the source.
From Ontology A (schema) (as resource):
http://localhost/OntoWiki/schema a owl:Ontology .

From Ontology B (externalsource1) (as resource):
http://localhost/OntoWiki/externalsource1 a owl:Ontology ;
owl:imports http://localhost/OntoWiki/schema .

From Ontology C (reg-instance) (as resource):
http://localhost/OntoWiki/reg-instance a owl:Ontology ;
owl:imports http://localhost/OntoWiki/externalsource1, http://localhost/OntoWiki/schema .

I have made sure that the appropriate prefixes were defined in the "configure KB".

Kind Regards,
Lisa

[LisaDawn]

Hi,

We looked at our KB and now the import is there. It seems like there is some latency issue. We originally loaded these KBs a week ago. We haven't tested how long it takes for the imports to show up, but somewhere between a few days and a week. Any idea what may be causing these issues? Are there some configuration settings we should set to make the transitive owl:imports happen faster?

thanks again,
lisa

[pfrischmuth]

Hi Lisa,

we tested this again with Virtuoso as well as with MySQL backend. We have an ontology A, which defines two classes, a ontology B, which defines two instances of this classes and imports A and an ontology C, which imports B. Cache is enabled and we get the expected results. Please make sure, that you use the right URIs for the import statements (e.g. a common mistake is two leave out the trailing slash). Is it possible that you send us the RDF files?

Cheers,
Philipp

[0xfeedface]

Here are the files we used for testing:

Ontology A:

@prefix owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#> .
@prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> .
@prefix : <http://localhost/OntoWiki/A/> .

<http://localhost/OntoWiki/A/> a owl:Ontology ;
  rdfs:label "Ontology A" .

:C1 a owl:Class ;
  rdfs:label "C1" .

:C2 a owl:Class ;
  rdfs:label "C2" .

Ontology B:

@prefix owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#> .
@prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> .
@prefix : <http://localhost/OntoWiki/B/> .

<http://localhost/OntoWiki/B/> a owl:Ontology ;
  owl:imports <http://localhost/OntoWiki/A/> ;
  rdfs:label "Ontology B" .

:I1 a <http://localhost/OntoWiki/A/C1> ;
  rdfs:label "I1" .

:I2 a <http://localhost/OntoWiki/A/C2> ;
  rdfs:label "I2" .

Ontology C:

@prefix owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#> .
@prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> .

<http://localhost/OntoWiki/C/> a owl:Ontology ;
  owl:imports <http://localhost/OntoWiki/B/> ;
  rdfs:label "Ontology C" .

[LisaDawn]

Thanks Philipp and Norman,
It looks like there may be an issue with our version. I tried the files that Norman attached to our up-to-date OW/ASKW develop branch version (running on Windows w/ Virtuoso) and it does work fine. However, on our own development branch version, it is not working (using the files above). Or, rather, it works sporadically. When testing earlier, the imported classes did not show up in our "Ontology C" until days later. Any hints as to where we should look in our code to help debug this?

I was hoping it would be a "slash" problem :) but it looks like it's not since we are still not seeing classes from Ontology C (using the files you provided) (which work on the ASKW develop branch).

Thanks again for looking at this. Hope it wasn't too much trouble to test. It would be really helpful if you could give us a pointer as to where we may have affected this functionality as we are a bit of a loss. :)

[LisaDawn]

To clarify, when I say "there is an issue with our version", I mean, our UDFR branch which is stored here: https://github.com/UDFR

[seebi]

ok, so I close this issue ...