IMO this is not a best practice modelling structure from the point of view of reuse. "hasInterior rdfs:range SpatialRegion" seems a general property that other classes in a using ontology might find useful. I would delete the domain here and use restrictions in the domain classes if using OWL. If using RDFS then I’d do as Richard suggested and make a superclass, which using ontologies could then also subclass thus encouraging reuse.
FWIW the meaning of hasInterior being an inverse of itself is confusing to me. How can x is interior to y AND y is interior to x both be true? Cheers, David > On 8 Jan 2020, at 07:34, 'Bohms, H.M. (Michel)' via TopBraid Suite Users > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Tx Irene > > In our cen topmodel we have such constructs like: > > bs:hasInterior > a owl:ObjectProperty ; > rdfs:domain [ > a owl:Class ; > owl:unionOf ( > bs:PhysicalObject > bs:Activity > ) ; > ] ; > rdfs:range bs:SpatialRegion ; > owl:inverseOf bs:hasInterior ; > skos:prefLabel "has interior"@en ; > skos:prefLabel "heeft inwendige"@nl ; > . > > Indeed not possible to reason/infer but from just a modelling/representation > viewpoint we indicate that this property is a property of some > physicalobject or some activity. If there is a hasInterior property in the > data but no physicalobject and no activity having this property (no object in > the triple of type physicalobject or activity) there would be a consistency > issue right? Or not? > > Would that be ok or should I better delete those domains at all? > > Thx 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> > > > <image001.gif> <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] <mailto:[email protected]> > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > Namens Irene Polikoff > Verzonden: Tuesday, January 7, 2020 5:11 PM > Aan: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > Onderwerp: Re: [topbraid-users] or-domains > > Since RDFS is about inferring the domain and range from the available data > rather than restricting what can be in the data, using OR for domains and > ranges does not make sense if one is staying with RDFS only. There isn’t > anything that could be inferred from such statements. > > If one is using domains and ranges in combination with OWL, then, depending > on the OWL axioms, having OR in the domains and ranges could help detect some > potential inconsistencies. > > So, yes to Richard’s suggestion of creating a common superclass. Then you > could at least infer that subject or object is a member of the super class. > > And yes to using using SHACL instead. In such case, I would discourage from > using rdfs:domain and range unless the goal is to create inferences based on > this info. > > The patterns for SHACL are as follows: > > If you want to use a property for members of different classes: > > You can define a property shape for a super class > You can also define a property shape for each individual class/node shape > > If you want to say that values of a property could be different datatypes > e.g., a date or date time, you can use sh:or. For convenience, there are some > pre-built unions in http://datashapes.org/dash <http://datashapes.org/dash> > > If you want to say that values of a property could be members of different > classes: > > You can use a parent class in the sh:class constraint > You can also use sh:or with multiple sh:class constraints > > > > On Jan 7, 2020, at 10:32 AM, Steven Michael Folsom <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > Is this a case where a SHACL NodeShape/s with a targetClass/es and > PropertyShapes would be helpful? > > In some ontology development we’ve done, we decided to leave domains and > ranges open (to encourage reuse), but also defined some implementation shapes. > > From: <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> on behalf of Richard Cyganiak > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > Reply-To: "[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> > Date: Tuesday, January 7, 2020 at 9:05 AM > To: topbraid-users list <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> > Subject: Re: [topbraid-users] or-domains > > The closest you can get to that in RDFS is to add a new class that has the > desired domains as its subclasses, and use that new class as the domain. > > Richard > > > > > On 7 Jan 2020, at 09:01, 'Bohms, H.M. (Michel)' via TopBraid Suite Users > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > wrote: > > > Dear, > How can we have multiple domains in OR-logic in RDFS (ie not having OWL > unions). > And also not using particular constructs like schema.org > <http://schema.org/>’s domainIncludes. > > Is there any way other than not having the domains at all? > > Thx 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> > > > <image001.gif> <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 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/c1a3101dbb0442a0bf31fc8f08bfb692%40tno.nl > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/topbraid-users/c1a3101dbb0442a0bf31fc8f08bfb692%40tno.nl?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/204378D0-C0AA-4EF6-B41A-D72D816726A5%40topquadrant.com > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/topbraid-users/204378D0-C0AA-4EF6-B41A-D72D816726A5%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/FB8617FD-6C8D-4387-B049-D694A0443586%40cornell.edu > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/topbraid-users/FB8617FD-6C8D-4387-B049-D694A0443586%40cornell.edu?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/E8961EBD-5D52-47E2-9F15-0CD349F69CE8%40topquadrant.com > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/topbraid-users/E8961EBD-5D52-47E2-9F15-0CD349F69CE8%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/c03d58686bc7441caab867774773e051%40tno.nl > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/topbraid-users/c03d58686bc7441caab867774773e051%40tno.nl?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]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/topbraid-users/37A3E8E1-81C0-453F-A848-28F64A4C79AF%40topquadrant.com.
