Hello, I have a simple instance model with a few individuals, one of which has a value constraint as part of its type definition: hasValueConstraint exactly 1 xsd:double[>= "15.5"^^xsd:double , <= "25.6"^^xsd:double]
My inference rules consist of 4 rules (rule1a-d) that match on such constraints and leave a mark in the form of a comment with the name of the relevant individual, and a 5th rule (rule2a) that matches on those comments and simply outputs a print statement. With the instance model containing the type definition above, rules 1a and 1b will fire, leave a mark, and rule 2a will fire soon after. However, if I change the above definition to contain a conjunction (still keeping Protege's reasoner happy), such as; hasValueConstraint exactly 1 (xsd:double[>= "15.5"^^xsd:double] and xsd:double[<= "25.6"^^xsd:double]) rules 1c and 1d fire accordingly and leave a mark, however, rule 2a interestingly no longer does. Rule 2a specifically looks for a triple containing the propertyFor object property, where the subject matches the individual marked as a comment by rules 1a-d, namely RoomTemperature. I also checked the model to ensure that the definition of RoomTemperature stays unchanged after applying the changes above. The relevant ontology, instance model, inference rules, and the source code (containing simple Jena API calls and model validation) which I use to fire the inference rules are all available on this GitHub Gist <https://gist.github.com/ivanspajic/28991218465d095c33dfb972841a123a>. Once compiled, the application can be run via the console by supplying 4 filepaths as arguments: the ontology filepath, the instance model filepath, the inference rules filepath, and the inferred (resulting) model filepath. I appreciate any help with the matter. Please do not hesitate to ask for any further clarifications. Kind regards, Ivan Spajić
