Thank you Dave, Ok I am going to read about the UPDATE statements and how it works to update our owl file.
On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 2:51 PM, Dave Reynolds <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 26/07/17 12:07, javed khan wrote: > >> Hello Dave, for instance, if we want to assign players to different >> classes >> i-e Star player or Average player based their goals like if player NoGoals >> >>> 10 then ?player rdf:type StarPlayer. >>> >> >> Can we do it using SPARQL Update? >> > > Yes, we've already said that. > > If yes, how? >> > > I think there's some misunderstanding here. We're not going to write your > code or rules or queries for you. As volunteers we try to help with aspects > of Jena as best we can but the basics of learning Sparql are up to you. As > is the design of your data flow, how updates will work and how you handle > change. > > Dave > > > >> On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 10:26 AM, Dave Reynolds < >> [email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> >>> On 25/07/17 11:57, javed khan wrote: >>> >>> Dave, the "Goal" here is a data property which has integer values. Is it >>>> monotonic in this case? >>>> >>>> >>> Presumably that means that when the number of goals change you remove the >>> statement with the old data property value and add a replacement >>> statement >>> with a different number. If so then that's the situation I've already >>> described that will work with rules just fine. >>> >>> Try it and see. >>> >>> Lorenz, from past post I have seen some where that if you put the >>> inferred >>> >>>> data into another model, then it may solve the problem. Is this the case >>>> or >>>> I have just misinterpret the meaning? >>>> >>>> >>> You have to think through (and if you want help, then describe to us) >>> exactly what the data flow is that you are after. Think of rules as just >>> a >>> building block - how you present data to the rules, what you do with the >>> resulting inferences and how you handle data changes all depend on the >>> specific problem you are dealing with. Taking the results of inference >>> (the >>> deduction model in the case of forward rules) and copying them somewhere >>> else may or may not be helpful depending on exactly what you are doing in >>> your overall system. >>> >>> Dave >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 10:53 AM, Lorenz Buehmann < >>> >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> I know rules are non monotonic, >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> No, that's exactly not the case for Jena rules - the computation is >>>>> monotonic. >>>>> >>>>> We had this discussion here several times, either it was you or some >>>>> other people (e.g. tina sani, kumar rohit etc.) doing the same >>>>> project/exercise/homework whatever >>>>> The answer is, you have to implement it by yourself in the client code >>>>> - >>>>> which means you have to remove the data that doesn't hold anymore. Or >>>>> you always refer to only the data that will be inferred by the rules >>>>> ad-hoc and don't write it back to the raw data. Indeed this might be >>>>> expensive but we don't know anything about your project. This are >>>>> typical design decision that YOU have to make based on YOUR >>>>> requirements. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>
