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] Problems with "rdf:type" constructs

Roberto Alves Gueleri r.a.gueleri at gmail.com
Tue Aug 21 09:34:54 PDT 2007


>
> > But the problem cannot be solved only by assenting that
> > "MetaClassA" is a subclass of "owl:Class". This would be true if I
> > only wanted to reach the order - or level - of "MetaClassA". But
> > what about the possibility for creating, for example, a
> > "MetaMetaClass", such that I will assert that "MetaClassA" is an
> > occurrence of "MetaMetaClass", as folows:
> >
> > ...
> > <owl:Class rdf:ID="MetaMetaClass"/>
> > <owl:Class rdf:about="#MetaClassA">
> >   <rdf:type rdf:resource="#MetaMetaClass">
> > </owl:Class>
> > ...
>
> I don't think that it matters.  Since both meta classes and meta-meta
> classes are subclasses of owl:Class.  The main issue is that Protege
> needs to know whether a particular name refers to a class or else to
> a non-class individual.  Meta classes and meta-meta-classes, etc. all
> have instances which are classes.  That is the key bit of information
> that Protege needs in order to correctly build its internal data
> structures, and which needs to be specified.



Yep!!! Now the ontology in Protege seems to work fine! I really didn't make
any idea that I need to say explicity that a metaclass is a subclass of
"owl:Class" in Protege, even thought a metaclass has classes as its
instances...

Thanks a lot!!!...
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.stanford.edu/pipermail/protege-owl/attachments/20070821/67c3f85f/attachment.html>


More information about the protege-owl mailing list