Hi Irene,

Wrt your “To be clear, I would not recommend this approach to data modeling. I 
also have to admit that I find this discussion pretty esoteric and largely 
irrelevant.”


We find this pattern/need very often in practice (multi-level typing). 
Catalogue products beings instances that are instantiated again for a client, 
properties defined with meta-data, instantiated again for actual properties of 
things, etc. etc. People use very different ways of dealing with it using 
punning, rdf:Property as range, objectproperties iso rdf:type having similar 
semantic intentions etc. etc. So I guess its important to know for certain 
variants what is actually inferred or not etc. I was glad the issue was brought 
up (again) by Jan. The start of the issue was actually a question of some 
clients on how to best combine say RDFS/OWL and SKOS since sometimes the thing 
modelled then could be both an instance and a class and the w3c spec sayd his 
would lead to owl full which might have been true for owl1 but not for owl2.

Greetings Michel






Dr. ir. H.M. (Michel) Böhms
Senior Data Scientist


T +31888663107
M +31630381220
E [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>

Location<https://www.google.com/maps/place/TNO+-+Locatie+Delft+-+Stieltjesweg/@52.000788,4.3745183,17z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0x47c5b58c52869997:0x56681566be3b8c88!8m2!3d52.000788!4d4.376707>



[cid:[email protected]]<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.









Van: [email protected] <[email protected]> Namens 
Irene Polikoff
Verzonden: Thursday, November 21, 2019 1:25 AM
Aan: [email protected]
Onderwerp: Re: [topbraid-users] Re: combining owl and skos

RDFS says:

rdf:type rdfs:range rdfs:Class.

Given

:x a :Eagle.
:Eagle a :Species.
:Species a owl:Class.

A tool that implements RDFS inferencing will conclude

:Eagle a rdfs:Class.
:Species a rdfs:Class.

If you add OWL into the mix, you may get

:Species rdfs:subClassOf owl:Thing.
:Eagle a owl:Thing.
owl:Nothing rdfs:subClassOf :Eagle.

Possibly, :Eagle a owl:NamedIndividual. I believe it has the same class 
extension as owl:Thing.

I can’t think of any other inferences entailed by the 3 triples above.

To be clear, I would not recommend this approach to data modeling. I also have 
to admit that I find this discussion pretty esoteric and largely irrelevant.


On Nov 20, 2019, at 8:23 AM, dprice 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

Because of things like “owl:Thing rdf:type owl:Class”, owl:disjointWith 
rdfs:domain/rdfs:range owl:Class, etc. I think it's owl:Class, but I’ve never 
looked at a specific reasoner’s behaviour in detail. May even vary from 
reasoner to reasoner.

Cheers,
David


On 20 Nov 2019, at 12:35, Irene Polikoff 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

I would think rdfs:Class, not owl:Class.



On Nov 20, 2019, at 4:48 AM, dprice 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

Everything that is the rdfs:range of rdf:type is by-definition an owl:Class.


--
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]>.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/topbraid-users/141FBB70-87C7-4838-8187-7355B2559387%40topquadrant.com<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/topbraid-users/141FBB70-87C7-4838-8187-7355B2559387%40topquadrant.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.

UK +44 (0) 7788 561308
US +1 (336) 283-0808


--
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]>.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/topbraid-users/59C5654B-C504-4DEA-B6C0-9B589B8158BD%40topquadrant.com<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/topbraid-users/59C5654B-C504-4DEA-B6C0-9B589B8158BD%40topquadrant.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.

--
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]>.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/topbraid-users/81C29C1A-50BD-4AFA-A7EF-8C85428056A4%40topquadrant.com<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/topbraid-users/81C29C1A-50BD-4AFA-A7EF-8C85428056A4%40topquadrant.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.

-- 
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].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/topbraid-users/fc4a73c7bab54b9fb948280f0a763673%40tno.nl.

Reply via email to