SOMA-HOME IRI does not match it's actual IRI

[shoeffner]

When I import SOMA-HOME in Protégé, it claims I'd have imported SOMA.

This is in line with what is written in SOMA-HOME.owl (uglified):

<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
<!DOCTYPE rdf:RDF [
    <!ENTITY owl 'http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#'>
    <!ENTITY rdf 'http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#'>
    <!ENTITY rdfs 'http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#'>
    <!ENTITY soma 'http://www.ease-crc.org/ont/SOMA.owl#'>
    <!ENTITY xsd 'http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#'>
]>

<rdf:RDF
    xmlns:owl="&owl;"
    xmlns:rdf="&rdf;"
    xmlns:rdfs="&rdfs;"
    xmlns:soma="&soma;"
    xmlns:xsd="&xsd;"
>
<owl:Ontology rdf:about="http://www.ease-crc.org/ont/SOMA.owl">
  <owl:imports rdf:resource="http://www.ontologydesignpatterns.org/ont/dul/DUL.owl"/>
  <owl:imports rdf:resource="http://www.ontologydesignpatterns.org/ont/dul/IOLite.owl"/>
  <owl:versionInfo rdf:datatype="&xsd;string">current</owl:versionInfo>
</owl:Ontology>

I would expect this to be more like

<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
<!DOCTYPE rdf:RDF [
    <!ENTITY owl 'http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#'>
    <!ENTITY rdf 'http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#'>
    <!ENTITY rdfs 'http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#'>
    <!ENTITY soma 'http://www.ease-crc.org/ont/SOMA.owl#'>
    <!ENTITY home 'http://www.ease-crc.org/ont/SOMA-HOME.owl#'>
    <!ENTITY xsd 'http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#'>
]>

<rdf:RDF
    xmlns:owl="&owl;"
    xmlns:rdf="&rdf;"
    xmlns:rdfs="&rdfs;"
    xmlns:soma="&soma;"
    xmlns:xsd="&xsd;"
>
<owl:Ontology rdf:about="http://www.ease-crc.org/ont/SOMA-HOME.owl">
  <owl:imports rdf:resource="http://www.ease-crc.org/ont/SOMA.owl"/>
  <owl:versionInfo rdf:datatype="&xsd;string">current</owl:versionInfo>
</owl:Ontology>

The way it currently is, it is impossible to e.g. load SOMA and SOMA-HOME into the same workspace in Protégé.

Or is this intended behavior? I.e. should I either use SOMA or SOMA-HOME? I always understood SOMA-HOME as an extension of SOMA.

[daniel86]

This is intended. SOMA-HOME includes SOMA.

[shoeffner]

Is there a specific reason why this is not solved via imports?

[mrnolte]

As discussed in the last weeks, this is indeed a problem. @daniel86 , this refers to the ontology IRIs not the imports.
It is also unclear which part of the SOMA sub-ontologies is present in the collapsed SOMA and which is in the collapsed SOMA-HOME.