Search Mailing List Archives

Limit search to: Subject & Body Subject Author
Sort by: Reverse Sort
Limit to: All This Week Last Week This Month Last Month
Select Date Range     through    

[protege-discussion] Simple and nooby question about inference in Protegé

Matteo Montalto matteo.montalto at
Tue Mar 25 08:03:28 PDT 2008

Nick Drummond ha detto: in data 25/03/2008 15.26:
> Matteo,
> Its not clear which version of Protege you are using for running your  
> rules.

Hello Nick and thanks for your help,
maybe you didn't see that, I wrote anyway I'm using protege 4.0, build 
58... Can you please tell me what's the right mailing list to ask for 
help with that version?
> You should post any Protege3.x OWL/SWRL questions in the protege-owl  
> list [1]
> Or Protege4.x questions in the protege4.0feedback list [2].

Uhm... but the list for feedback is intended also to get help in such 
questions? :)

> I'm no SWRL expert, but it seems you could get your expected behaviour  
> by just using equivalent classes in OWL.
> Parent  = Person and (hasChild some Thing)

of course Nick, I just forgot to explain that my attempt was just an 
example to use some owl:restriction construct into swrl rules. I'm 
working on a project for my thesis, using the jena framework, and my use 
of Protege is limited to some ontology I build ad hoc to test some cases.
This was the case in which an swrl rule contains an owl:restriction; but 
neither Protege nor my Jena project tell me that trivial assertion, 
which is that Stephanie is a Parent.
So I guess there's something wrong but cannot find what's the point :)
Thanks again :)

More information about the protege-discussion mailing list