Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Manchester Syntax support #8

Closed
VladimirAlexiev opened this issue Mar 4, 2024 · 3 comments
Closed

Manchester Syntax support #8

VladimirAlexiev opened this issue Mar 4, 2024 · 3 comments

Comments

@VladimirAlexiev
Copy link
Collaborator

VladimirAlexiev commented Mar 4, 2024

Do we want a setup for Manchester Syntax? At least syntax highlighting, maybe also indentation.
My org code blocks are highlighted, I think thanks to a module by the fabulous "jkitchin".

There is omn-mode for emacs:

It is in ELPA:

BTW, it's used in a Clojure-based ontology creation environment, similar to the idea of your "elot":
https://github.com/phillord/tawny-owl

@johanwk
Copy link
Owner

johanwk commented Mar 4, 2024

I use omn-mode myself. It works, but could be improved -- especially when exporting to HTML, prefixes are not handled well. Probably omn-mode is such a "must have" for ELOT that it would make sense to make it a dependency, in some sense of the word. It seems natural to me to automatically install it with ELOT, which I think you are suggesting.

There's an interesting new development for Manchester Syntax described here, i.e., extending to cover all of OWL: https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-3515/paper-12.pdf, which is also apparently (partly at least) in the OWL API owlcs/owlapi#1104. I would think the omn-mode doesn't cover the latest improvements. Well, maybe we could try to help with that.

@VladimirAlexiev
Copy link
Collaborator Author

  • when we make a module header (make module header #9), we'll include dependency on omn-mode, similar to this:
;; Package-Requires: ((emacs "26.1") (dash "2.12") (s "1.10.0") (org "9.3") (compat "29.1"))
  • we should also add
(require `omn-mode)
  • can you elaborate on "prefixes are not handled well? Do you mean the coloring is wrong?
  • I've browsed the first page of the paper "Extending OWL2 Manchester Syntax to Include Missing Features from OWL2 Abstract Syntax" and it doesn't seem to introduce new keywords, so no change will be needed to omn-mode.
  • If new changes (or other fixes) are needed, sure we can adopt omn-mode.

@johanwk
Copy link
Owner

johanwk commented Mar 28, 2024

omn-mode added as a requirement

@johanwk johanwk closed this as completed Mar 28, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants