Hi Bernard, one might argue both directions. On the one hand side, same instances should be suppressed (if you interpret the "count" as the number of distinct instances. On the other hand, the count may be the number of rdf:type triples for that class, in which case the current behavior is correct.
In TBC I did not implement option 1 due to performance reasons. If we would have to distinguish same objects, then we would need to walk through a complete result set, while if we just accumulate statistics then it's enough to just ask the triple store for the number of matches - an operation that is significantly faster than walking through them all. Holger On Apr 17, 2009, at 5:48 AM, PaulZ wrote: > > I have been preparing a short showcase with Ensemble for a non > semantic web technologies aware audience. > > Following scenario confused them immensely. > > Having a class with name City. > Having created all instances of City from one specific country. > Now using the DBpedia mapper creating for every city a > owl:sameAs relation with the corresponding DBpedia resource. > > Running inferences. > > Result: > all DBpedia resources became rdf:type City now. > Result2: > The number of instances on the City class has doubled. > > Should the counting not take into account the owl:sameAs semantics > that they are in fact the same instance? > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TopBraid Composer Users" group. To post to this group, send email to topbraid-composer-users@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to topbraid-composer-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/topbraid-composer-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
