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-owl] Property cardinality exactly 0: is this correct?

João Olavo Baião de Vasconcelos joaoolavo at gmail.com
Fri Aug 3 10:46:48 PDT 2007


On 8/3/07, Nick Drummond <nick.drummond at cs.manchester.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> is not qualified. Therefore, you can't relate members of C to
> anything along p.
> In OWL1.1 you could be more specific:
>
> C -> p exactly 0 B


Great! But... It leads to OWL-Full. =/
Why? Is there a solution?

I'm using Protege 3.2.1. Does it use OWL 1.0?

This is equivalent to the OWL1.0 expression:
>
> C -> not (p some B)


Ok, but I liked the prior notation and it'll help me in another situations
that I can't achieve using the notation above.

Does Protege new version use OWL 1.1 and it doesn't lead to OWL-Full?

Thanks!
-- 
João Olavo Baião de Vasconcelos
Ciência da Computação
UFES
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.stanford.edu/pipermail/protege-owl/attachments/20070803/563f4890/attachment.html>


More information about the protege-owl mailing list