Search Mailing List Archives
[protege-owl] Property cardinality exactly 0: is this correct?
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).
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?
> João Olavo Baião de Vasconcelos
> Ciência da Computação
> protege-owl mailing list
> protege-owl at lists.stanford.edu
> Instructions for unsubscribing: http://protege.stanford.edu/doc/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the protege-owl