If you want on the fly cardinality checks you could extend something like PA4RDF (https://sourceforge.net/projects/pa4rdf/) to do the validation on read/write
On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 9:12 PM, Márcio Vinicius <[email protected]>wrote: > One question that still lingers in my head, which would use my ontology? > Currently I use a model and store in the database, but at no time use the > ontology development. > > > 2013/10/2 Márcio Vinicius <[email protected]> > > > Okay, so I'll have to make all the rules in java? I'll have to check if > > the Learning Object already has a value for the property name? > > > > Thus no sense to create an ontology, since the idea is to generate a > > database with the rules of the ontology (properties: inverse, transitive, > > functional, etc.) where I can use a reasoner such as Pellet and generate > > inferences. > > > > carefully. > > > > > > 2013/10/2 Ralph Perniciaro <[email protected]> > > > >> Thanks for the explanation. Working with ontologies is certainly a > >> different way of thinking, but I understand what you are saying. > >> > >> > >> On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 1:10 PM, Chris_Dollin <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > >> > On Wednesday, October 02, 2013 10:47:45 AM Ralph Perniciaro wrote: > >> > > I believe that I have the same issue. If I create an ontology in > >> protege > >> > > and define an entity to have a property called title and specify > that > >> it > >> > > should have exactly 1 title. If I load the model into Jena and then > >> > create > >> > > an individual of my entity type, I can add more than 1 title to the > >> > > individual. I was going to add my own checks to prevent this, > unless > >> > > someone can explain how Jena can enforce cardinality rules. > >> > > >> > Jena doesn't enforce cardinality rules, except in the sense that you > >> > can run validation checks to make sure the model is consistent. > >> > But note that if C is some class with a restriction that P has exactly > >> > one value, and you assert > >> > > >> > c rdf:type C > >> > c P a > >> > c P b > >> > > >> > then you haven't violated a cardinality rule; you've asserted that > >> > > >> > a owl:sameAs b > >> > > >> > which may or may not be generated by the inference you're using. > >> > > >> > (Since `title` is probably string-valued, it's a little trickier, "of > >> > course".) > >> > > >> > If you want on-the-fly cardinality checks in Jena you can always > >> > write them youself. That way you can be as pragmatic as you please. > >> > > >> > Chris > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > *Márcio Vinícius Oliveira Sena* > > Bacharelando em Sistemas de Informação - UFG > > Desenvolvedor Front-end no Laboratório de Tecnologia e Mídias > Educacionais > > - Labtime/UFG > > Gerente de Projeto e Desenvolvedor Front-end > > @marciosena17 <http://twitter.com/marciosena17> > > > > > > > -- > *Márcio Vinícius Oliveira Sena* > Bacharelando em Sistemas de Informação - UFG > Desenvolvedor Front-end no Laboratório de Tecnologia e Mídias Educacionais > - Labtime/UFG > Gerente de Projeto e Desenvolvedor Front-end > @marciosena17 <http://twitter.com/marciosena17> > -- I like: Like Like - The likeliest place on the web<http://like-like.xenei.com> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/claudewarren
