Duplicate Classes in reprDataModel.ttl

[lewismc]

The following occur (possible duplicates) at the bottom of reprDataModel.ttl

###  http://sweetontology.net/reprDataModel/Vector
dmrepr:Vector rdf:type owl:Class ;
              rdfs:subClassOf dmrepr:DataModel .


###  http://sweetontology.net/reprDataProduct/Data
data:Data rdf:type owl:Class .


###  http://sweetontology.net/reprSciModel/Model
mod:Model rdf:type owl:Class .


###  http://sweetontology.net/reprSpace/Space
space:Space rdf:type owl:Class .


###  http://sweetontology.net/reprSpaceGeometry/GeometricalObject_2D
obj:GeometricalObject_2D rdf:type owl:Class .


###  http://sweetontology.net/reprSpaceGeometry/Point
obj:Point rdf:type owl:Class .


###  http://sweetontology.net/reprSpaceGeometry/Rectangle
obj:Rectangle rdf:type owl:Class .


###  http://sweetontology.net/reprSpaceGeometry3D/GeometricalObject_3D
obj3d:GeometricalObject_3D rdf:type owl:Class .


###  http://sweetontology.net/reprTime/Time
time:Time rdf:type owl:Class .

Why are these double declared?

[graybeal]

Vague memory from looong ago says it has been that way a long time. If they are identical, since identical declarations are meaningless, I suggest removing them.

[lewismc]

I have a feeling this is going on in more places as well John. We really need a hackathon of sorts (ESIP Summer...) to sort this out. In the meantime I'll go ahead and submit a PR to simply remove the duplications highlighted above.

[cmungall]

How are people editing the ontology? Usually these things come out in the wash after a roundtrip via the OWLAPI or Jena

On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 6:50 PM Lewis John McGibbney < [email protected]> wrote:

I have a feeling this is going on in more places as well John. We really need a hackathon of sorts (ESIP Summer...) to sort this out. In the meantime I'll go ahead and submit a PR to simply remove the duplications highlighted above.

— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/ESIPFed/sweet/issues/113#issuecomment-463465865, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AADGOTrra6h1gLDr2eHIOF_7aAKKakvfks5vNM7_gaJpZM4a6hgw .

[lewismc]

@cmungall we have a watchdog process which polls the source files in Github and pushes any new versions to the COR. This process may be the culprit. I will investigate.

[graybeal]

oh, I was going in a totally different direction on that question. "Until very recently, people haven't edited this ontology for a long time, and when they did back then, it was a manual process (maybe with Protégé version 2 or something equally user-friendly). So there would be lots of opportunity for duplication."

But there are other possibilities, like the one Lewis suggests. I wouldn't expect anyone to have done any round-tripping of these ontologies, given their history.