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?

Nick Drummond nick.drummond at cs.manchester.ac.uk
Tue Aug 7 02:09:04 PDT 2007


Yes, you must be using OWL1.1 to use qualified cardinality (this is  
supported by Protege4.0).

Nick

On 3 Aug 2007, at 18:46, João Olavo Baião de Vasconcelos wrote:

> 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
> _______________________________________________
> protege-owl mailing list
> protege-owl at lists.stanford.edu
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-owl
>
> Instructions for unsubscribing: http://protege.stanford.edu/doc/ 
> faq.html#01a.03

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.stanford.edu/pipermail/protege-owl/attachments/20070807/e9c39904/attachment.html>


More information about the protege-owl mailing list