Hello Suzanne;  I'm not sure this is clear yet.  Are you describing
class restrictions?  I.e. something along the lines of:
  :Person rdfs:subClassOf [:hasProf some :profession]
(Sorry for mixing Manchester and RDF syntax, but hopefully the intent
is understandable.)

Or do you mean that there are instances of :Person with :profession's,
such as:
  :Person :hasProf :engineer

...or something else.  I'm having difficulty understanding the
relationship between your property (has_a or has_a_profession) and the
owl:oneOf class definition.

In terms of SWRL, what rule processor was used to make the inference?

-- Scott

On Nov 12, 2:09 pm, Suzanne Collier <[email protected]> wrote:
> Holger,
>
> Thanks!
>
> Ok, so here is a sample ontology, which I hope clarifies things.
>
> Ontology1:
>        has a class person
>        each person has a profession
>
> Ontology2:
>        has a class professional
>        each professional has a profession
>        each profession is owl:oneOf {engineer, teacher, doctor,
> lawyer...}
>
> The mapping that takes place is:
>
> ont1:profession -> ont2:profession
>
> In TopBraid this seems to require iterating through the owl:oneOf list
> to pick the correct type.  In the SWRL rule this is not necessary.  We
> wrote the SWRL rules by hand in the rdf/xml format.
>
> Thanks for your help!
>
> Suzanne
>
> On Nov 12, 11:46 am, Holger Knublauch <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > For my first question, I may have not been specific enough.  I am
> > > creating a function via an eclipse plug-in, which requires me to
> > > extend AbstractFunction1, AbstractFunction2 or AbstractFunction3.
> > > This is what is limiting the number of arguments.  Is there a
> > > workaround for this?
>
> > Ah, yes sure. Either implement the Jena interface Function directly,  
> > or subclass
>
> > org.topbraid.sparql.functions.AbstractFunction
>
> > > For my second question, here is the SWRL rule which corresponds to the
> > > query:
>
> > > <ruleml:imp>
> > >    <ruleml:_body>
> > >      <swrlx:datavaluedPropertyAtom swrlx:property="&ont1;property">
> > >        <ruleml:var>entity</ruleml:var>
> > >        <ruleml:var>value</ruleml:var>
> > >      </swrlx:datavaluedPropertyAtom>
> > >    </ruleml:_body>
> > >    <ruleml:_head>
> > >      <swrlx:individualPropertyAtom swrlx:property="&ont2;property">
> > >        <ruleml:var>entity</ruleml:var>
> > >        <ruleml:var>value</ruleml:var>
> > >    </ruleml:_head>
> > >  </ruleml:imp>
>
> > > For some reason in SWRL it matches the URI without having to iterate
> > > through the list.  Let me know if you need anymore information.
>
> > Yes I guess we will need more information. What tool did you create  
> > the above rule with? Doesn't look like real SWRL to me. Also, you  
> > stated that you need to match against owl:oneOfs? I don't see how this  
> > is related. Could you provide the actual example ontology and some  
> > other clues?
>
> > Thanks
> > Holger
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to