# Sample Ontologies

Real-world ontologies for testing and demonstration.

## Included

| File | Source | Description |
|------|--------|-------------|
| `pizza.owl` | [Stanford/Manchester](https://protege.stanford.edu/ontologies/pizza/pizza.owl) | Classic OWL tutorial ontology, 100+ classes |
| `wine.owl` | [W3C OWL Guide](https://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/wine.rdf) | Wine ontology with rich class/property structure |
| `foaf.rdf` | [FOAF Project](http://xmlns.com/foaf/spec/) | Friend of a Friend vocabulary |
| `prov-o.ttl` | [W3C PROV](https://www.w3.org/ns/prov-o) | Provenance Ontology |
| `goodrelations.owl` | [GoodRelations](http://purl.org/goodrelations/v1) | E-commerce ontology |
| `geography-thesaurus.ttl` | Sample | SKOS thesaurus with 100+ concepts across 4 hierarchy levels |
| `skos-showcase.ttl` | Sample | A small, deliberately well-formed SKOS vocabulary: poly-hierarchy, two schemes, labels in three languages, notations, and mappings to Wikidata and AGROVOC |

**On the two SKOS samples.** They are opposites on purpose.

`skos-showcase.ttl` reports nothing under SKOS Validation at any tier. It is
what a well-formed vocabulary looks like, and it is the one to copy from.

`geography-thesaurus.ttl` has no errors or warnings, but its Americas and
Oceania branches are **disconnected** from the rest of the hierarchy, which the
editorial tier reports as disconnected concept clusters. Those flaws are left in
deliberately: a sample that reports nothing demonstrates nothing about
validation. Please do not tidy them up without also removing the test that
depends on them (`tests/test_skos_examples.py`).

**Note:** Schema.org uses `rdfs:Class` / `rdf:Property` instead of OWL types, so it won't show classes or properties in OrionBelt.
