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] Checking inconsistence of a "some" relation

João Olavo Baião de Vasconcelos joaoolavo at gmail.com
Fri Aug 3 21:32:54 PDT 2007


On 8/3/07, Samson Tu <swt at stanford.edu> wrote:
>
> However, the 'red border' check is a legacy from Protege frame. It doesn't
> really  mean much in OWL, with its open world assumption.
>
> The fact that you don't have an explicit B instance associated with A
> doesn't mean that the ontology is inconsistent.


I got it. The open world assumption means that you can't assume that a C
isn't a B just bec they are distinct classes, right?

But it's important to me to check if a C is/isn't a B for the sake of
consistence.
What is the best way to check it? By swrl rules?

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/20070804/0bc9059e/attachment.html>


More information about the protege-owl mailing list