Hi Irene, when experimenting....
It seemd not possible to instantiate a Restriction (seperate from a
class). indicating the owl:onProperty went fine nut then trying to
give it a string value does not work (text stays red).
any suggestions?
(I also tried to define other way round for a class but then when
deleting the class the restriction is also deleted so that does not
work...)
thx michel
what I did:
- define Class Put
- define a datattype property code with range string
- defined a (anonymous) restriction with owl:onProperty code (went fine)
- then tried to put say : 111" into owl:hasValue and THAT did not work...
if that worked I would try to make Put a sunclass of that restriction
and define an individual with coe "111" and then see if after
reasoning I have an individual of Put inferred.
(that was the idea)
Op woensdag 15 april 2015 14:52:07 UTC+2 schreef Irene Polikoff:
<and can indeed reasoners do 3) because they can already do 2,
which is in fact 1and3)?>
You should experiment and see what happens. 3 alone should give
you an inference :B rdf:type :Class1 in my example.
Irene
From: "Bohms, H.M. (Michel)" <[email protected] <javascript:>>
Reply-To: <[email protected] <javascript:>>
Date: Wednesday, April 15, 2015 at 3:19 AM
To: "[email protected] <javascript:>"
<[email protected] <javascript:>>
Cc: "[email protected] <javascript:>" <[email protected]
<javascript:>>
Subject: FW: FW: [topbraid-users] sufficient modelling
Hi Irene,
Thx for your information/explanation. Since you say "***If, for
some unusual reason,*you wanted to create restrictions
independently from the named classes they are used to define, y"
I try to reformulate a bit better, just to better understand (in
my reasoning it's not an unuasual reason so I probably don't
understand it right....).
Suppose I have A(x) and R(x), A being a named class and R being an
anonymous restriction class. I then see three options that could
be relevant:
1) A(x) -> R(x)
You define the class A and define the restriction R for it and
make A a subclass of R. R is a necc. condition for A.
2) A(x) <-> R(x)
You define a class A and define again restriction R but now say
equivalent class iso subclass.
R is a necc. and also sufficient condition for A (in case you know
something satisfies R(x) you know it is a member of A(x) so you
could automatically classify.
So these two ways are the typical constructs I up to now
encountered and used. But now the unusual one, in second sight
doesnt seem so unusual at all (well to me):
3) R(x) -> A(x)
Now we cannot start with a defined class but have to first
instantite R(x) after making it visible in the class tree.
So we define a restriction class and then say its a subclass of A(x).
Now we can only partially/incomplete classify because R(x) is
optional for A.
(so in my view 2) is just 1) AND 3)....)
Is this storysofar still ok?
and can indeed reasoners do 3) because they can already do 2,
which is in fact 1and3)?
Thx again! Michel
2015-04-14 17:41 GMT+02:00 Bohms, H.M. (Michel) <[email protected]
<javascript:>>:
Dr. ir. H.M. (Michel) Bohms
Sr. Research Scientist
Structural Reliability
T +31 (0)88 866 31 07
M +31 (0)63 038 12 20
E [email protected] <javascript:>
Location <http://www.tno.nl/locaties/DTM>
<http://www.tno.nl/>
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.
*From:*[email protected] <javascript:>
[mailto:[email protected] <javascript:>] *On Behalf Of
*Irene Polikoff
*Sent:* dinsdag 14 april 2015 16:16
*To:* [email protected] <javascript:>
*Subject:* Re: [topbraid-users] sufficient modelling
Michel,
If I understood you correctly, the answer is “it doesn’t matter,
the end result is always the same”.
Create a restriction your usual way, then expand it in the class
form and ctrl click on the owl:Restriction in the expanded display
to navigate to it. You will see that it has an instance (or
several instances depending on how many restrictions you have
created). These instances are anonymous resources of type
owl:Restriction. You can explore them.
If, for some unusual reason, you wanted to create restrictions
independently from the named classes they are used to define, you
could go to Preferences in TBC and adjust them for the Classes
tree so that owl:Restriction appears there. Then create instances.
Put the appropriate properties in the owl:onProperty widget and
appropriate classes or values into owl:hasValue,
owl:someValuesFrom or whatever you want to use. Then, go to a
named class and drag and drop the appropriate instance into the
rdfs:subClassOf or owl:equivalentClass widgets.
If you look at the resulting RDF, it will be identical
irrespective of how you got there (provided that it is the same
type of restriction).
<Hwat does it mean to be sufficient but NOT necessary? (potential
incomplete classification?)>
"Sufficient and necessary" terminology is not part of OWL. It
is Protégé specific terminology. In OWL, there are rdfs:subClassOf
and owl:equivalentClass connections to some other classes. The
meaning ((what could be inferred) based on such relationships to
restrictions is defined in the OWL spec. It depends on the type of
restriction. For example:
If :Class1 is a subclass of a restriction [onproperty hasID,
owl:hasValue=14220), then for each :A rdf:type :Class1, you can
infer that :A :hasId ‘14220’.
But if you have a resource :B of some other or unknown type and
:B :hasId ‘14220’, you can’t infer that :B rdf:type :Class1.
If :Class1 is an equivalent class of this restriction, then you
can make both inferences - :A :hasId ‘14220’ and B rdf:type :Class1.
Regards,
Irene Polikoff
*From: *"Bohms, H.M. (Michel)" <[email protected] <javascript:>>
*Reply-To: *<[email protected] <javascript:>>
*Date: *Tuesday, April 14, 2015 at 5:53 AM
*To: *"[email protected] <javascript:>"
<[email protected] <javascript:>>
*Subject: *[topbraid-users] sufficient modelling
I have a question about modelling “subclassses the other way round”.
Typically I model, classes with restrictions being described as
subclasses of anonom. classes.
Sometimes I do the same with equivelnt classes in case of necc. &
sufficient conditions.
But, til now, I never modelled only the way back….saying a an.
Restriction class as subclass of a named class.
(so my LHS of x-> y is now something like [onproperty hasID,
owl:hasValue=14220)
With that info I could check an instance for this code and derive
it is an instance of my named class.
Another example: everything having a xHeight is actially an X.
(same but now using someValuesFrom iso hasValue)
So now my questions:
-How do I do this in topbraid (till now it was the other way
round, defining a class and then a restriction)
-Since equivalence is both ways I guess the way back only also
makes sense right?
-Hwat does it mean to be sufficient but NOT necessary? (potential
incomplete classification?)
-How do reasoners deal with this backward Subclassing (do they do
it? Is it much harder for them for such complex LHS…?)
-
Thanks a lot! Michel
Dr. ir. H.M. (Michel) Bohms
Sr. Research Scientist
Structural Reliability
T +31 (0)88 866 31 07
M +31 (0)63 038 12 20
E [email protected] <javascript:>
Location <http://www.tno.nl/locaties/DTM>
<http://www.tno.nl/>
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), Reference Data Manager (RDM),
TopBraid Composer, TopBraid Live, TopBraid Insight, SPARQLMotion,
SPARQL Web Pages and SPIN.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
<javascript:>
---
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] <javascript:>.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout
<https://groups.google.com/d/optout>.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Group "TopBraid Suite Users", the topics of which include
Enterprise Vocabulary Network (EVN), Reference Data Manager (RDM),
TopBraid Composer, TopBraid Live, TopBraid Insight, SPARQLMotion,
SPARQL Web Pages and SPIN.
To post to this group, send email to
[email protected] <javascript:>
---
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] <javascript:>.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout
<https://groups.google.com/d/optout>.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Group "TopBraid Suite Users", the topics of which include
Enterprise Vocabulary Network (EVN), Reference Data Manager (RDM),
TopBraid Composer, TopBraid Live, TopBraid Insight, SPARQLMotion,
SPARQL Web Pages and SPIN.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
<javascript:>
---
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] <javascript:>.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout
<https://groups.google.com/d/optout>.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Group "TopBraid Suite Users", the topics of which include Enterprise
Vocabulary Network (EVN), Reference Data Manager (RDM), TopBraid
Composer, TopBraid Live, TopBraid Insight, SPARQLMotion, SPARQL Web
Pages and SPIN.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
---
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]
<mailto:[email protected]>.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
