Hey, guys,
One of your suggestions to my problem was to use a SPARQlMotion,
but I'm quite a new to it and because I'm a bit of running a time
can you prompt me how to define 2 rules which infer the 3rd one using
SPARQLMotion?
Let's say the 1st rule saying :
CONSTRUCT {
?c :hasProcessCB true .
}
WHERE {
?c :hasModel ?m .
?m :hasProcess ?p1 .
?p1 :hasInitiator ?i .
?i a :BankClient .
?p1 :hasRecipient ?r1 .
?r1 a :IslamicBank .
}
And another one saying :
CONSTRUCT {
?c :hasProcessBS true .
}
WHERE {
?c :hasModel ?m .
?m :hasProcess ?p1 .
?p1 :hasInitiator ?i .
?i a :BankClient .
?p1 :hasRecipient ?r1 .
?r1 a :IslamicBank .
}
The 3rd one is a conclusion saying that:
CONSTRUCT {
?c a :Istisna .
}
WHERE {
?c :hasProcessCB true .
?p1 :hasFinancialInstrument ?f1 .
?f1 a :Cash .
?p1 :hasSequenceNo 1 .
?c :hasProcessBS true .
?p1 :hasFinancialInstrument ?f1 .
?f1 a :Cash .
?p1 :hasSequenceNo 2 .
}
Please guide me how to put them into SparqlMotion since I'm totally
new to it.
Thanks, Aziza.
On Mar 30, 12:55 pm, Scott Henninger <[email protected]>
wrote:
> Aziza; Rule chaining can be achieved in SPIN using the
> spin:nextRuleProperty. Suppose you have two rule sets, rs1 and rs2.
> Make two subproperties of spin:rules:
> spin:rs1 rdfs:subPropertyOf spin:rule
> spin:rs2 rdfs:subPropertyOf spin:rule
>
> … and set an order between them using spin:nextRuleProperty, i.e.
> spin:rs1 spin:nextRuleProperty spin:rs2 spin:rs2
> spin:nextRuleProperty spin:rule
>
> When running TopSPIN all rules for spin:rs1 are executed followed by
> spin:rs2 and finally spin:rule.
>
> You can also specify rule orderings through SPARQLMotion. The TopSPIN
> module includes a property, sml:predicate, which can be filled with
> any subproperty of spin:rule. For example if sml:predicate =
> spin:rs1, the TopSpin module will run all spin:rs1 queries. After the
> TopSPIN module has been executed, the script can branch to run other
> TopSPIN modules with different predicates set, and either accumulate
> the results of each TopSPIN or accumulate the inferences. This is a
> highly flexible way of creating rule chains.
>
> -- Scott
>
> On Mar 29, 11:31 pm, Holger Knublauch <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Yes, it is possible to have rule chaining in SPIN. By default, the TopSPIN
> > engine doesn't implement this though, and does a fix-point iteration only.
> > I am yet to be convinced that many real-world use cases really require rule
> > chaining. In most cases that I have seen, rules don't even depend on each
> > other, and just link from one source structure into a target structure.
>
> > In any case, it is often a good alternative to place the computation of
> > values that depend on each other into SPIN functions and magic properties.
> > This way you can exactly control what gets computed to help with other
> > computations.
>
> > Holger
>
> > On Mar 30, 2011, at 1:36 PM, aziza wrote:
>
> > > HI everyone,
> > > want to know: whether it's possible to have Rule Chaining (like Jena
> > > Rules have) in SPIN?
> > > Aziza
>
> > > --
> > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> > > Group "TopBraid Suite Users", the topics of which include TopBraid
> > > Composer,
> > > TopBraid Live, TopBraid Ensemble, SPARQLMotion and SPIN.
> > > 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-users?hl=en- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Group "TopBraid Suite Users", the topics of which include TopBraid Composer,
TopBraid Live, TopBraid Ensemble, SPARQLMotion and SPIN.
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-users?hl=en
