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] cardinality restrictions don't work

Victor Mataré matare at lih.rwth-aachen.de
Wed Nov 9 07:13:02 PST 2011


I see. Thanks a lot. Open worlds can be tricky ;-)

On Monday, 07.11.2011 19:26:02 Timothy Redmond wrote:
> 
> > All individuals are distinct. Now *all* reasoners correctly classify Building2
> > as a House, but Building1 is never classified as a Shack. Same problem if I
> > use "max" instead of "exactly". Looks to me like the "max" and "exactly"
> > restrictions just don't work. Did I overlook some gotcha or is this actually a
> > bug?
> 
> It doesn't look like you ever said that Room1 is the only room of 
> Building1.  Based on your data there could be another one.  I added the 
> assertion that Building1 only has the room Room1 and the reasoner gave 
> the expected result.
> 
> -Timothy
> 
> 
> 
> On 11/07/2011 04:17 PM, Victor Mataré wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm using Protégé 4.2.0 Build 249 (also tried some 4.1) and I'm having
> > problems with cardinality r
strictions. Test case is attached. What I'm trying
> > to do is this:
> >
> > A Shack is a Building with exactly 1 Room. A House is a Building with at least
> > 2 Rooms.
> >
> > Building1 hasRoom Room1,
> >
> > Building2 hasRoom Room2,
> > Building2 hasRoom Room3.
> >
> > All individuals are distinct. Now *all* reasoners correctly classify Building2
> > as a House, but Building1 is never classified as a Shack. Same problem if I
> > use "max" instead of "exactly". Looks to me like the "max" and "exactly"
> > restrictions just don't work. Did I overlook some gotcha or is this actually a
> > bug?
> >
> > thanks anyway for a great tool...
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > protege-discussion mailing list
> > protege-discussion at lists.stanford.edu
> > https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-discussion
> >
> > Instructions for unsubscribing: http://protege.stanford.edu/doc/faq.html#01a.03
>
-------------- next part --------------
pgp-signature; name"signature.asc"
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (GNU/Linux)

iQEcBAABAgAGBQJOupiAAAoJEKCBIN2TwJAHlGwH/jNVa2JzpncclS6w7/DcsnKF
lo3FF5mhV8lV01AM5XBCdgejAqmhWWpWE8mzPYfZtjeInV0+BrK03YG+z/gt9MK6
RqwhKth2UcLvb3qOQzk8H9L7uK6qV4CAaxV7YfDUMyKbwHpVT7q+wxVtH1VWwxEU
JQMpyTHBLDQgbLU9XX+TTMXilWlbdSQshqOgILNTCjFZnmChLW0/N/fhl2iVs16a
XQ8MSCaMCfN6+yDGL/IgEt2iAF3pbHndKNrMhXkuOkG4O0RvCUqGeCBuP+0m+CT9
y5upWKq9yTWgWkO5agMT+twDUYEf8s9JcC1h90cFjUQbTaRM5quqvSdokuJYOL8QZci
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


More information about the protege-discussion mailing list