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] existentials and the OWLThing built-in [Re: Re: SWRL doubt: using rules to add new individuals? (Samson Tu)]

Nacho Mayorga nmayorga at
Thu Aug 30 01:44:28 PDT 2007

Hello, Samson,

thanks for your answer!

Check to see whether Protege SWRL extension built-in "createOWLThing"
> satisfies your need. See
> The built-in is used on the antecedent side of the rule.
> SAmson

I've read the built-in description and I've got some more doubts left:

- first of all, I'd need the new individual to belong to a specific class,
not just OWLThing. Will it be possible either forcing the class or changing
it later (though still in the same rule)?

- I'm not sure whether using the built-in in the antecedent would be what I
needed, but I guess that, having all the variables instantiated, it should
be the same

- and, finally, the explanation in the wiki reads:

However, while not convenient, existential created in this way are
> theoretically safe. In contrast, existentials created using this built-in
> will be beyond the immediate reach of OWL classifiers. They should probably
> not be stored permanently in an OWL ontology.

with the first sentence referring to the existential restriction
owl:someValuesFrom for adding new individuals. Could you, please, explain

a) the existentials created by means of owl:someValuesFrom are not

and why the individuals created by using this built-in (createOWLThing)
would be

  b) out of the immediate reach of classifiers and
  c) should probably not be stored permanently in the ontology?

Thanks a lot once again,

Nacho Mayorga
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the protege-owl mailing list