So use of + is the syntax. Does this also address the ordering?
-----Original Message-----
From: Cong Wang [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Friday, August 03, 2012 9:47 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Transitivity
First, you can try ?x predicate + ?y … For example, select * where { ?x
owl:sameAs+ ?y .}
otherwise, i believe you can use OWL syntax, say predicate is transitive, then
use whatever reasoner to do inference first. then query
--
Cong Wang
Sent with Sparrow (http://www.sparrowmailapp.com/?sig)
On Friday, August 3, 2012 at 2:32 PM, David Jordan wrote:
> Of course that reasoning needs to occur to compute the transitivity.
> That would result in triples containing A Predicate B B Predicate C C
> Predicate D
>
> But I think the question is how that set of triples could get returned
> as A B C
>
> I'd be very interested in understanding how to do this also.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cong Wang [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Friday, August 03, 2012 9:13 AM
> To: [email protected] (mailto:[email protected]); Anthony
> Ramalho
> Subject: Re: Transitivity
>
> why not use reasoner to saturate ontology first? then query…
>
> --
> Cong Wang
> Sent with Sparrow (http://www.sparrowmailapp.com/?sig)
>
>
> On Friday, August 3, 2012 at 1:52 PM, Anthony Ramalho wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Does anybody know a way of using the transitivity facet of OWL in a way
> > that we can, for example, perform a query with SPARQL and get a result
> > based on:
> > a -> b -> c -> d
> >
> > So, querying "a" we get all the others in that order.
> >
> > Thanks for your help,
> >
> > Anthony Andrey
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
