Thank you Michael for your feedback! I have the same inhibitions as Irene, and
yet we need to keep spreading the word. Best, -j
From: topbraid-users@googlegroups.com On
Behalf Of Irene Polikoff
Sent: 25 March 2020 16:38
To: topbraid-users@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [topbraid-users] question
Think the benefits of shacl over owl are clear.
Still there are owl users with owl tools using owl reasoning that are not 100%
sure they can do all their owl things in shacl (given their tools have the
capability of handling shacl at all).
Eg when they use inference like autoclassification
On 25/03/2020 16:45, Rob Atkinson wrote:
Thanks Holger - that got this going
If I may post a follow up
What I want to do is display a set of properties for this node - I was
presuming I'd be able to find the right widget
after a bit of experimentation I managed to get ui:resourceView to
So actually...the approach below, cardinality plus allvaluesfrom seems even
better
Op 25 mrt. 2020 14:41 schreef Irene Polikoff :
Can you use cardinality instead of qualified cardinality? Depends on what you
want to say.
Qualified cardinality 1, as you probably know, means that exactly 1
Can you use cardinality instead of qualified cardinality? Depends on what you
want to say.
Qualified cardinality 1, as you probably know, means that exactly 1 value has
to be decimal, other values can be of another data type. While simple
cardinality says that the total number of values,
"Also, in OWL, constraints are constraints on classification, not
constraints on specifying values of properties. It is often precisely the
people who are slow in starting with SHACL that are not fully aware of
this. "
I just want to say how strongly I agree with what Jan said. I've used OWL
Also, in OWL, constraints are constraints on classification, not constraints on
specifying values of properties. It is often precisely the people who are slow
in starting with SHACL that are not fully aware of this.
Even with simple cardinality specified to exactly 1, a resource can have none
Yes, agree. The actual meaning of OWL cardinality restrictions (given the Open
World and Non Unique Name assumptions) and what would happen once you have data
is yet another topic.
I intentionally did not say anything about this because I think I already said
in the past something like “it
Hi Michel,
we have (long) moved away from OWL 2 and suggest to use SHACL for these
use cases. The example with rdf:value looks like sh:minCount 1;
sh:maxCount 1; sh:datatype xsd:decimal.
Holger
On 25/03/2020 17:25, 'Bohms, H.M. (Michel)' via TopBraid Suite Users wrote:
A, ok!
The
Thanks Holger - that got this going
If I may post a follow up
What I want to do is display a set of properties for this node - I was
presuming I'd be able to find the right widget
after a bit of experimentation I managed to get ui:resourceView to work to
display and instance of a blank
Hi Holger,
It's been a while, but I discovered a workflow that does not contain the
same properties as the production copy. I checked the differences between
the two in the comparison report and checked the change history, but I
couldn't find any changes (deletions) made to those properties in
I know, the question was specifically for OWL.
Some of the involved parties have tools that do not support SHACL.
We cannot force them (now) to SHACL-only mode.
Can I do:
bs:QuantityValue
rdf:type owl:Class ;
rdfs:subClassOf owl:Thing ;
rdfs:subClassOf [
rdf:type owl:Restriction ;
Fixed the issue, since it was only one working copy (the others were not
affected with this issue), I started looking in the Turtle code. Somehow
the NodeShape of the class with the missing properties was missing
(probably got deleted by one of the editors in the workflow). Never mind my
Despite seen as exotic, still a question on owl2 property chaining.
The functional-style syntax name is ObjectPropertyChain.
In Turtle however called: owl:propertyChainAxiom (NOT:
owl:objectPropertyChainAxiom)
That's strange, you would expect the second name.
Anyway I now assume that this
> On 25 Mar 2020, at 11:19, 'Bohms, H.M. (Michel)' via TopBraid Suite Users
> wrote:
>
>
> Despite seen as exotic, still a question on owl2 property chaining.
>
> The functional-style syntax name is ObjectPropertyChain.
>
> In Turtle however called: owl:propertyChainAxiom (NOT:
>
15 matches
Mail list logo
