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] Property restrictions

Joachim Baran joachim.baran at
Wed Oct 17 04:32:26 PDT 2012


On 2012-10-17, at 1:01 AM, Matthew Horridge <matthew.horridge at> wrote:.  
> There's a couple of things.  Although you say there can be at most one stand property to an individual that is a Strand this doesn't mean that it isn't possible to have another stand property to something that isn't an instance of Strand.  However, if both of the individuals are indeed instances to Strands then if there isn't anything that forces them to be distinct individuals (either explicitly or implicitly) then they will be interpreted to be the same object since there can be at most one.
  I understand. I had expected that declaring the individuals of Strand to be distinct would have been sufficient. So, there is no other way than using enumeration classes to solve this? 

Thank you,

More information about the protege-discussion mailing list