Scott, this is very helpful and I can see how SPARQL CONTRUCT would be useful as yet another method of triple creation.
If there is a problem with my triple then there is an errata in the Allemang & Hendler book because the triple is taken directly from the solution on page 131. I'll quote it here so that it may be useful to others: > --------------quoted from book begin----------------- > Since we want owl:inverseOf to work in both directions, this can be done > easily by asserting that owl:inverseOf is its own inverse, thus: > owl:inverseOf owl:inverseOf owl:inverseOf . > > You might have done a double take when you read that owl:inverseOf is its > own inverse. Fortunately, we have a more readable and somewhat more > understandable way to say this - namely: > owl:inverseOf rdf:type owl:SymmetricProperty . > --------------quoted from book end----------------- > What I am trying to figure out is prior to this declaration, owl:inverseOf only works one-way, after this is defined, owl:inverseOf will work in both directions. If I were to fererate across two respostiries where one of them redefined the owl:inverseOf in this manner, it would be change at a global level. --tk On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 8:15 AM, Scott Henninger <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > > Hello; There is a problem with your triple in that owl:inverseOf is a > property and is used as the subject in "owl:inverseOf rdf:type > owl:SymmetricProperty". That's not allowed, so the redefinition > couldn't happen. > > In addition, redefining rdf/rdfs/owl terms will not happen via > inference. You can extend these - for example creating a subproperty > of rdfs:label. And this is the intent of the Allemang & Hendler pages > you cite. > > In general, though, inferencing can be aggressive and the ontology has > to be designed with care. This is one of the reasons TopQuadrant is > spending resources to use SPARQL CONSTRUCT, for example, to provide > infrastructure for more controlled "inferencing". Take a look at > http://spinrdf.org, which is part of these overall efforts. > > -- Scott > > On Dec 9, 6:15 pm, "tk blast" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hello fellow, > > in the Allemang/Hendler book, on page 130-131 there is a discussion about > > OWL to Extend OWL. > > I want to make sure I understand the ramification of this type of > assertion. > > > > If I were to import a file.owl that contained the triple: > > owl:inverseOf rdf:type owl:SymmetricProperty . > > it would redefine owl:inverseOf for all instances right? > > > > I guess what i am asking is when one goes about redefining items in the > owl > > namespace, > > appropriate care must be given to the scope of those assertions. Just > like > > rdfs:domain and rdfs:range, the inferences are aggresive and must be > treated > > with care. > > > > --tk > > > > -- > > > > "The nervous system organizes itself so as to compute a stable reality" - > > Maturana & Varela > > > -- "The nervous system organizes itself so as to compute a stable reality" - Maturana & Varela --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TopBraid Composer Users" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/topbraid-composer-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
