Search Mailing List Archives
[protege-owl] someValuesFrom and allowable instances
meng at tcs.inf.tu-dresden.de
Tue Sep 19 08:54:15 PDT 2006
I checked this feature with Protege 3.2b installed on my computer and
found it a bit bizarre. If you have a property P in your ontology with
an asserted domain DP and range RP, it should not mean that you cannot
have a property assertion IND1 related by P to IND2 with IND2 not
explicitly belonging to RP.
So, in your example, you should be able to assert that P relates an
instance I1 from class C1 to another instance I2 from class C3. If the
ontology is consistent, the reasoner should be able to infer that I2
belongs to the class C2 (as being drawn from the property range
If I'm not mistaken, Protege should not pose such a restriction on
which individuals can be used.
On 9/19/06, dimitris bilidas <dim83bil at hotmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks for your reply!
> Actually that was what I was thinking, but I am afraid that maybe I have
> misunderstood something about the someValuesFrom. So, if anyone else thinks
> something different, please reply!
> >From: "Park, Jeahyun" <jhpark at islab.hanyang.ac.kr>
> >Reply-To: User support for the Protege-OWL
> >editor<protege-owl at lists.stanford.edu>
> >To: protege-owl at lists.Stanford.EDU
> >Subject: Re: [protege-owl] someValuesFrom and allowable instances
> >Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2006 20:18:31 +0900
> >Because you fixed the class C2 to the range of the property P, Protege will
> >show only the class C2 in the individual widget.
> >Of course, someValuesFrom's range is denoted as the class C3. But, you
> >cannot connect with any instances of the class C3
> >for the range of the property P if you were using the Protege.
> >SomeValuesFrom is just a restriction, but range is a part of the schema.
> >The latter seems to be more stronger than the former.
> >However, if the ontology already had an instance having an instance of C3
> >the range of P (You may manipulate the ontology manually, e.g. by notepad),
> >you could create a project with the instances as it is. It's not erroneous.
> >It may be correctly inferred as an instance of the class C1.
> >"dimitris bilidas" <dim83bil at hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:BAY112-F113E7C7D6F60C22257D88DC32E0 at phx.gbl...
> > > Hello all,
> > >
> > > I have an Object Property P with domain the class C1 and range the class
> > > C2.
> > > Then, I put a someValuesFrom restriction so that the instances of C1,
> > > the property P, must have some values from the class C3.
> > >
> > > Now, when I'm going to add values to the property P for the instances of
> > > C1,
> > > in the "Select Instance" panel, there are listed as allowable values
> > > the instances of C2 and not those of C3. Why does this happen? Any
> > > explanation???
> > >
> > > Thanks in advance and sorry if this has been asked before!
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > protege-owl mailing list
> > > protege-owl at lists.stanford.edu
> > > https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-owl
> > >
> >protege-owl mailing list
> >protege-owl at lists.stanford.edu
> protege-owl mailing list
> protege-owl at lists.stanford.edu
More information about the protege-owl