Thanks, Michel. I would much rather re-use Dublin Core than craft something de novo.
Cheers, Tim On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 4:47 AM, Bohms, H.M. (Michel) <[email protected]>wrote: > Have a look at hasPart releationship (individual level decomposition) > avail. From Dublin core. > > Use QCRs to restrict. > > > > That’s how we do it after trying many options… > > Seems most flexible/natural/efficient > > > > Gr Michel > > > > > > Dr. ir. H.M. (Michel) Böhms > Sr. Research Scientist > Technical Sciences > > T +31 (0)88 866 31 07 > M +31 (0)63 038 12 20 > E [email protected] > > Location <http://www.tno.nl/locaties/dtm> > Disclaimer <http://www.tno.nl/emaildisclaimer> > > > <http://www.tno.nl/> > > > > > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto: > [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Tim Williams > *Sent:* maandag 20 januari 2014 20:27 > > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [topbraid-users] Looking for part-whole relations Example > for TopBraid > > > > Thank you for the advice, Irene. I'm struggling with the use case > because I have two usage scenarios: > > > > In one case I am cataloging parts when they come off a car during the > restoration process. So I need to know all of the engine parts of "Car #1" > vs. all the parts from "Car #2". It makes sense to model this based on > instances. Part 1 is a direct Part of the instance of Engine 1. > > > > On the other hand I want to catalog an inventory of parts that are > purchased new and sitting on the shelf. This could later become part of Car > #1 or Car #2, depending on future need and the fact that some parts are > interchangeable between some cars. This makes more sense (to me) on a Class > basis. > > > > I am using whole-part relations so I can easily query "just engine parts > that directly make up the engine internals" , for example. > > > > I will keep playing! > > > > Cheers, > > > > Tim > > On Thursday, January 16, 2014 4:37:10 PM UTC-5, Irene Polikoff wrote: > > First question to consider is if you are planning to manage individual > instances of cars, engines, etc. If you are not, then you could create a > single class such as CarComponent, declare that your isDirectPartOf > property has it as both domain and range and make Car, Engine, etc. members > of this class connecting them as appropriate. > > > > If you plan to manage instances of cars and parts, make them subclasses of > the CarComponent class, then start creating OWL restrictions. For example, > to say that class Engine is a subclass of things that are a direct part of > a Car. In this case, you may also want to consider using a property going > into another direction, so that you could, for example, say that a car must > have an engine or that it must have 4 wheels or whatever. > > > > I don't know if you really need to differentiate between direct and > indirect properties. It depends on what application you are envisioning and > how you are planning to use inferencing. In SPARQL you can get all > transitive parents or children by simply using a star (*) at the end of the > property. > > > > Regards, > > > > Irene Polikoff > > > On Jan 15, 2014, at 3:05 PM, Tim Williams <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Folks, > > > > I am new to TopBraid and OWL generally so please forgive my ignorance. > > > > I am trying to develop an example ontology for an inventory of car parts. > For example, let's say I have classes for: > > > > Car > > Engine > > EngineInternal > > EngineCylinderhead > > EngineIntake > > Part > > > > Where Cars have Engines, Engines have Internal, Cylinderhead and Intake > components. Parts is general class for all parts. > > > > I want to express the parts break down using isPartOf , isDirectPartOf > relations, so I can find "all Engine Parts", for example. > > > To do this I have defined the properties: > > *isPartOf *as transitive > > *isDirectPartOf* as a subproperty of *isPartOf*. It is NOT > transitive. > > > > How do I best apply the isDirectPartOf? Must I apply the property to both > Classes and Instances as it appears to state in the W3 guidance? > > > > > http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/OEP/SimplePartWhole/simple-part-whole-relations-v1.3.html > (see Pattern1 for an inventory approach) > > If I create and instance of a Car (Car-1), an Engine (Engine-1), a > Cylinderhead (Cylinderhead-1) and a Part (Part-1) I can make the instance > Part-1 have property isDirectPartOf CylinderHead-1, CylinderHead-1 > isDirectPartOf Engine-1, Engine-1 isDirectPartOf Car-1, and the parts roll > up as expected. But is this the correct approach? Shouldn't I also have > SubClassOf relations like "Engine isDirectPartOf some Car" ? > > How best to do this in TopBraid? > > I look forward to any advice or examples you can provide. > > > Cheers, > > Tim > > -- > > -- > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Group "TopBraid Suite Users", the topics of which include Enterprise > Vocabulary Network (EVN), TopBraid Composer, TopBraid Live, TopBraid > Insight, SPARQLMotion, SPARQL Web Pages 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 > > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "TopBraid Suite Users" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > > > Dit bericht kan informatie bevatten die niet voor u is bestemd. Indien u > niet de geadresseerde bent of dit bericht abusievelijk aan u is > toegezonden, wordt u verzocht dat aan de afzender te melden en het bericht > te verwijderen. TNO aanvaardt geen aansprakelijkheid voor de inhoud van > deze e-mail, de wijze waarop u deze gebruikt en voor schade, van welke aard > ook, die verband houdt met risico's verbonden aan het elektronisch > verzenden van berichten. > > > > This message may contain information that is not intended for you. If you > are not the addressee or if this message was sent to you by mistake, you > are requested to inform the sender and delete the message. TNO accepts no > liability for the content of this e-mail, for the manner in which you use > it and for damage of any kind resulting from the risks inherent to the > electronic transmission of messages. > > -- > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Group "TopBraid Suite Users", the topics of which include Enterprise > Vocabulary Network (EVN), TopBraid Composer, TopBraid Live, TopBraid > Insight, SPARQLMotion, SPARQL Web Pages 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 > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the > Google Groups "TopBraid Suite Users" group. > To unsubscribe from this topic, visit > https://groups.google.com/d/topic/topbraid-users/t24z-6Vhz04/unsubscribe. > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Group "TopBraid Suite Users", the topics of which include Enterprise Vocabulary Network (EVN), TopBraid Composer, TopBraid Live, TopBraid Insight, SPARQLMotion, SPARQL Web Pages 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 --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TopBraid Suite Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
<<image001.gif>>
